Application for costs by law firm second respondent following unsuccessful judicial review application – partner of firm is solicitor on the record but independent barrister engaged as counsel – is the law firm a “party acting in person” under rule 14.2(2A) High Court Rules 2016?  – should an award of costs be made for counsel assisting under s 178 Senior Courts Act 2016?

Jindal v District Court at Auckland [2025] NZHC 3096 per O’Gorman J

Gautam Jindal is a former client of Rice Craig. Rice Craig successfully brought a claim in the District Court to recover unpaid legal fees. Jindal appealed. The appeal was later discontinued by joint memorandum.

Jindal then unsuccessfully pursued judicial review proceedings relating to the conduct of the District Court hearing. He represented himself. The first respondent, the District Court at Auckland, abided. Rice Craig was the second respondent and took an active part, with a barrister representing them. The High Court also appointed counsel to assist.