Simply staggering

Phillips v Heremaia relates to two sisters engaged in litigation with respect to their father’s estate. Although the matter settled at a judicial settlement conference not agreement was reached with respect to costs, which are the subject of this judgment.

The following at [3] and [4] sets the tone for the decision:

Rule 15.23 of the High Court Rules provides for a presumption that a plaintiff who discontinues proceedings will be liable for costs. This reflects the proposition that discontinuance is “ordinarily tantamount to judgment for the defendant” so that costs follow the event.

However, there are exceptions to this presumption. Associate Judge Paulsen discusses these at [23] to [25]:

The primary issue for consideration then became, who was successful? The court found that both had a measure of success in the settlement reached and that, having settled, the court was in no position to consider the merit of the respective arguments.

The court’s conclusion and reasoning is a salutary reminder of the need for perspective when a party to litigation. See [40] and [41]:

References

• Phillips v Heremaia [2023] NZHC 3847
• High Court Rules, r 15.23
• Powell v Hally Labels Ltd [2014] NZCA 572 at [19]
• Earthquake Commission v Whiting [2015] NZCA 144, (2015) 23 PRNZ 411 at [63] and [71]