Walker v Pacific Maritime Holdings Inc (No. 3) [2020] CKHC 23; Plaint 19 of 2018 (20 April 2020)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE COOK ISLANDS
HELD AT RAROTONGA
(CIVIL DIVISION)

PLAINT NO. 19/18

BETWEEN
DENNIS REGINALD WALKER
Plaintiff

AND
PACIFIC MARITIME HOLDINGS INC.
Defendant

Hearing dates: 22 March 2019; and 30-31 May 2019

Counsel: Mr W Rasmussen for Plaintiff Mr B Mason for Defendant

Date of Minute: 18 February 2020

Judgment (No.1): 16 December 2019

Judgment (No.2): 23 March 2020

Judgment (No.3): 20 April 2020

SUPPLEMENTARY JUDGMENT (NO.3) OF HUGH WILLIAMS, CJ

(Re. Costs)

[0780.dss]

[1] In Judgment (No.2), the first judgment in this matter concerning costs, the defendant was awarded disbursements, being part of Hannay Law’s account, of^[1] “($A3,375), plus $A500 for the arrangements concerning Skype and half, $A750, for their conferences with Mr Duffy” The total was given^[2] as $A5,125.

[2] Unfortunately, as Mr Mason, counsel for the defendant, properly pointed out in his memorandum of 14 April 2020, while the total allowance to the defendant for Hannay Law’s disbursements is correct at $A5125, the total is incorrect. Reconsideration of the judgment shows one of the intended components was overlooked in the detail.

[3] What was intended was:

• (a) Allowing the whole of items 1-4 of Hannay Law’s bill – $A3,375;
  
• (b) Allowing half of item 6 on Hannay Law’s bill – $A500;
  
• (c) Allowing the whole of item 8 on Hannay Law’s bill – $A500;
  
• (d) Allowing half of item 10 on Hannay Law’s bill – $A750;
  
• (e) Total – $A5,125.
  

[4] The oversight is regretted and is corrected by means of the “slip rule”.

Hugh Williams, CJ

---

^[1] At [21].
^[2] At [28].