Gougeon v ANZ Bank (Vanuatu) Ltd [2006] VUSC 39; CC 071 1996 & CAC 006 1998 (2 June 2006)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU
(Civil Jurisdiction)

CIVIL CASE No.71 OF 1996

BETWEEN:

GRAZIELLA LAILLE GOUGEON
Applicant

AND:

ANZ BANK (VANUATU) LIMITED
First Defendant

AND:

THE ESTATE OF AIME CLAUDE MALERE
Second Defendant

CIVIL APPEAL CASE No.06 of 1998

BETWEEN:

ANZ BANK (VANUATU) LIMITED
Appellant

AND:

GRAZIELLA LAILLE GOUGEON
First Respondent

AND:

The Estate of AIME CLAUDE MALERE
Second Respondent

AND:

REUBEN Q. TAMATA
Third Respondent

AND:

HONOURABLE JOE NATUMAN
Fourth Respondent

AND:

LEVI TAROSA
Fifth Respondent

AND:

THE GOVERNMENT OF VANUATU
Sixth Respondent

Mr Silas C. Hakwa & Ms Marie Hakwa for the Applicant/Claimant/Respondent in the appeal
Mr Wade Roper for the Defendant ANZ Bank in the Supreme Court and Respondent in the Court of Appeal

DETERMINATION ON COSTS IN THE COURT
OF APPEAL

This is an application for determination of costs submitted by Hakwa of counsel on behalf of the Applicant/Respondent. The total costs submitted for determination is of VT312,814. The application is for the Applicant/Respondent in the Appeal to recover his costs in the Court of Appeal in CC 06 of 1998.

Briefly, a judgment was delivered by the Supreme Court on 25 September 1998 in favour of the Claimant / Applicant and the Plaintiff (Claimant) is entitled to costs against Malere and the ANZ jointly. Those costs to be agreed or failing agreement to be taxed.

The ANZ Bank appealed the Judgment of the Supreme Court of September 1998. Before the hearing of the Appeal, Mrs Suzan Bothmann Barlow, who had then the carriage of the matter sold her practice to Ridgway Blake Lawyers and took residence in Sydney, Australia. Mr Garry Blake of Ridgway Blake Lawyers could not represent the Respondent in the appeal because of a conflict relating to his earlier involvement in another law firm. Mrs Suzan Bothmann was then engaged to represent the Respondent in the appeal. She had then to be flown from Sydney/Vila/Sydney for that purpose. Her travel expenses were of VT107,169. The Appellant now Respondent in this application objected for that item of costs to be recovered because they say it is not reasonable as there are available counsel in Vanuatu who are able to represent the Respondent before the Court of Appeal at that point in time.

I heard submissions from both counsel. I accept the submissions of counsel for the Appellant that those costs are not reasonable to recover. The itemized costs of travel expenses of VT107,169 are therefore rejected. The balance of costs determined is of VT312, 814 less VT107,169 = VT205,645. The Respondent/Applicant applies for VT45,000 for the costs of the application. Upon hearing submissions by both counsel, the Court granted also the costs of VT45,000 to the Applicant for the costs of her application and incidental to it.

The total costs determined is of VT205,645 + VT45,000 = VT205,645. The Applicant is entitled to costs determined at VT205,645.

ORDER

1. The Applicant/Respondent, Graziella Laille Gougeon, is entitled to costs determined at the VT205,645 against the Appellant ANZ Bank.
   
2. The Appellant to pay those costs of VT205,645 by 28 days from the date of this determination.
   

DATED at Port-Vila this 2nd day of June 2006

BY THE COURT

Vincent LUNABEK

Chief Justice