IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE	
CIV-2020-404-83
[2020] NZHC 1974	

UNDER	The Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016	
IN THE MATTER	of a judicial review	
BETWEEN	GUANGBO JIANG
First Applicant

JINHONG WAN
Second Applicant

MIAOJIN JIANG
Third Applicant

LAI JIANG
Fourth Applicant	
AND	CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND
EMPLOYMENT
Respondent	

Hearing:	On the Papers at Auckland	
Appearances:	J R Moss for the Applicants
B C L Charmley and M Djurich for the Respondent	
Judgment:	7 August 2020	

JUDGMENT OF POWELL J
[Costs]

This judgment was delivered by me on 7 August 2020 at 3.30 pm pursuant to R 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

JIANG v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND EMPLOYMENT [2020] NZHC 1974 [7 August 2020]

[1]	In my judgment of 25 June 2020, I found in favour of the respondent, the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and declined the application for judicial review.1 In my decision I set out a timetable in the event the respondent sought costs.

[2]	The respondent has now applied for costs against the applicants on a 2B basis in the total sum of $17,686.2 The applicants have not taken any steps to oppose the costs sought.

[3]	As the respondent has noted the parties had previously agreed that costs should be appropriately categorised as 2B. On this basis, and having checked the amounts sought, I am satisfied that the costs claimed are both reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, the respondent is entitled to judgment for costs against the applicants in the sum of $17,686.

Powell J

1	Jiang v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business [2020] NZHC 1439.
2	The respondent sought costs of $17,686 inclusive of GST, however, utilising the schedule provided by the respondent this sum is in fact simply the relevant scale costs calculated in accordance with sch 3 of the High Court Rules 2016, and an award of scale costs is GST neutral. See New Zealand Venue and Event Management Ltd v Worldwide NZ LLC [2016] NZCA 282, (2016) 23 PRNZ 260 at [7]-[10].