PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Supreme Court of Vanuatu

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Supreme Court of Vanuatu >> 1998 >> [1998] VUSC 25

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Help

Port Vila Hardware Ltd v Marchand [1998] VUSC 25; Civil Case 154 of 1996 (1 July 1998)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 154 of 1996

BETW>BETWEEN:

PORT VILA HARDWARE LTD
Plaintiff

Ap>

FRANCOIS MARCHAND
Defendant

Coram: Justice Oliver A.SAKSAK sitting in Chambers.

Counsel: Mr. Alain Lew as Representative of the Plaintiff.
Mr. Francois Marchand, Defendant in person.

JUDGMENT ON TAXATION OF COSTS

Parties and Representations

The Plaintiff is represented by Mr. Silas Charles Hakwa of Silas Charakwa & Associates. On 2 On 2nd July 1998 at the hearing of the Plaintiff’s application for taxation, Mr. Hakwa was not able to attend due to his commitments in Parliament. He advised to that effect by letter dated 2nd July and sought to have the Application dealt with in his absence. Mr. Alain Lew was present at the Chambers hearing as the Plaintiff’s representative.

Basis of Application

The Plaintiff’s Application for Taxation was made pursuant to paragraph 2 of the Orders of the Court dated 27th February 1998 whereby the Court ordered the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff’s costs or failing agreement to have such costs taxed. The Plaintiff’s Bill of Costs is dated 18th March 1998 for the total sum of VT1.047.000 made up as follows: -

(a) Professional Costs = VT1.00

(b) Disbursements = & p;&nssp;&nsp; &nsp; &nbbsp 4

uote>
ote>

&nnbsp;; --------------

Total = VT1.047.000

The Defendant does not agree to this figure and the parties come before the Court for taxation of the above sum.

Applications

There was only one Application before the Court in respect of taxation of two separate Bills of Costs in relation to two separate cases being –

(a) Civil Case No. 154 of 1996; and

(b) Civil Case No. 83 of 1996.

The Defendant is the same person in each of the two cases.

I will deal with each case separately.

Civil Case No. 154 of 1996: Port Vila Hardware Ltd. –v- Francois Marchand

The Plaintiff claims a total of VT1.047.000 in costs. Counsel for the Plaintiff submits that the Plaintiff is entitled to their full costs. They argue that this matter commenced in October 1996 and was a matter capable of settlement in 1996 but non-settlement was due to the Defendant’s refusal. On 22d February 1998 the Defendant finally agreed for Judgment to be entered against him for the recovery of the outstanding debt against him. It is argued that due to his failure to settle in 1996, the matter proceeded until 1998 and in the process, the Plaintiff incurred further costs and fees.

The Defendant tells the Court that he accepts to pay only VT1.200.000 on the basis that this amount is costs in respect of both Civil Cases No. 154 and 83 of 1996 respectively. He submits that both Bills of Costs are too high compared to costs charged by other solicitors. He was ordered to submit those Bills for examination by the Court which the Defendant did on Friday 3rd July.

I have looked at those Bills and I am satisfied that they have been charged at the normal rate of Solicitors costs in Port Vila at VT20.000 per hour. I find that when George Vasaris & Co. acted for the Defendant in respect of Civil Case No. 83 of 1996 he was charged a total of VT106.800 for services provided during the period from 22nd May 1996 to 18th October 1996. Messrs. Silas Hakwa & Associates have acted for the Plaintiff in this case commencing on 09th May 1996 to 20th March 1998. This is more than 1 year and 10 months. I accept the Plaintiff’s submission therefore that whereas there could have been settlement in October 1996, the Defendant refused and due to that, costs have been further incurred for which the Defendant has to be held accountable.

The Court ordered also that Counsel for the Plaintiff submit all Files in their power or possession to the Court for examination for the purposes of taxation. Counsel complied and submitted all Files on Friday 3rd July 1998. I have examined their File in relation to Civil Case No. 154 of 1996 and I make the following assessments –

Date

Hour/Rate Claimed

Hour/Rate Allowed

Amount/VT Claimed

Amount/VT Allowed

04/10/96

1hr @ VT20.000

½ hr only

(Time as per File)

20.000

10.000

20/10/96

(SIC)

1 hr @ VT20.000

½ hr only

(Time as per File)

20.000

10.000

20/11/96

4 hrs @ VT20.000

3 hrs only

(Time as per File)

80.000

60.000

22/11/96

2 hrs @ VT20.000

-

40.000

40.000

22/11/96

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

06/12/96

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

10/01/97

1/10 hr @ VT20.000

-

2.000

2.000

14/01/97

1/10 hr @ VT20.000

-

2.000

2.000

16/01/97

2 hrs @ VT20.000

1 ½ hrs only

(Time as per File)

40.000

30.000

22/01/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

22/01/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

29/01/97

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

30/01/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

5.000

5.000

10/02/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

14/02/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

26/02/97

1 ½ hrs @ VT20.000

1 hr only

(Time as per File)

30.000

20.000

26/02/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

10/03/97

1 ½ hrs @ VT20.000

1 hr only

(Time as per File)

30.000

20.000

07/04/97

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

14/05/97

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

26/05/97

2 hrs @ VT20.000

-

40.000

40.000

29/05/97

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

03/06/97

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

17/06/97

1/10 hr @ VT20.000

-

2.000

2.000

23/06/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

23/06/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

23/06/97

¼ hr @ VT20.000

-

5.000

5.000

27/06/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

02/07/97

¼ hr @ VT20.000

-

5.000

5.000

04/08/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

25/08/97

1/10 hr @ VT20.000

-

2.000

2.000

05/09/97

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

24/09/97

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

25/09/97

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

21/10/97

¼ hr @ VT0.000

-

5.000

5.000

05/11/97

1/10 hr @ VT20.000

-

2.000

2.000

08/11/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

19/12/97

5 hrs @ VT20.000

4 ½ hrs only

(Time as per File)

100.000

90.000

22/12/97

1 ½ hrs @ VT20.000

-

30.000

30.000

23/12/97

½ hr @ VT20.000

-

10.000

10.000

02/02/98

2 hrs @ VT20.000

-

40.000

40.000

03/02/98

1 ½ hrs @ VT20.000

-

30.000

30.000

17/02/98

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

25/02/98

2 hrs @ VT20.000

-

40.000

40.000

26/02/98

¼ hr @ VT20.000

-

5.000

5.000

27/02/98

1 ½ hrs @ VT20.000

-

30.000

30.000

27/02/98

1 hr @ VT20.000

-

20.000

20.000

10/03/98

3 hrs @ VT20.000

-

60.000

60.000

Total Professional Costs Allowed =

935.000

Plus Disbursements:-

(a) Court Fee - Allowed VT17.000

(b) Photocopying - " VT20.000

(c) Facsimile - " VT 3.000

(d) Telephone - " VT 2.000

(e) Miscellaneous & Sundries - " VT 5.000

Total Allowed = VT47.000

The total amount of professional costs and disbursements in my assessment and findings is certified in the sum of VT982.000.

This Court orders the Defendant to pay the sum of VT982.000 to the Plaintiff’s Solicitor within 14 days from the date of this Order. There will be no order as to the costs of taxation.

Dated at Port Vila, this ......... day of July 1998.

BY THE COURT

Oliver A. SAKSAK
Judge


PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/vu/cases/VUSC/1998/25.html