STOVES V COMMISSIONER OF POLICE HC CHCH CIV-2009-409-000011
The court exercised its discretion to order costs against the unsuccessful appellant because the appeal was unmeritorious and the appellant's asserted hardship did not justify withholding costs; costs were fixed on a 2B basis with specified disbursements.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- openlaw-df330beb_dacf_458a_a2c5_c0d45a4d26d6.pdf
- Parties
- Appellant: Colyn David Stoves; Respondent: Commissioner of Police
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 19 May 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under Human Rights Act 1993 S123 / Costs Application After Judgment
- Outcome
- Costs awarded to respondent; appellant ordered to pay costs and disbursements.
- Legal Topics
- Costs Awards, Hardship, Strike Out, Unmeritorious Proceedings
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Colyn David Stoves
Appellant
Commissioner of Police
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Human Rights Act 1993 S123 / Costs Application After Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether costs should be awarded to the successful respondent
- 2 Whether appellant's asserted inability to pay and hardship justify withholding costs
- 3 Whether costs on a 2B basis are appropriate for both the strike out application and the appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The court exercised its discretion to order costs against the unsuccessful appellant because the appeal was unmeritorious and the appellant's asserted hardship did not justify withholding costs; costs were fixed on a 2B basis with specified disbursements.
Court Disposition
Costs awarded to respondent; appellant ordered to pay costs and disbursements.
Orders
- The appellant pay the respondent costs in the sum of 2800.00 NZD.
- The appellant pay the respondent disbursements in the sum of 1760.30 NZD.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
STOVES V COMMISSIONER OF POLICE HC CHCH CIV-2009-409-000011 19 May 2009IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV-2009-409-000011UNDER the Human Rights Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal against a decision of the Human Rights Review Tribunal pursuant to s123 of the Human Rights Act 1993 BETWEEN COLYN DAVID STOVES Appellant AND COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Respondent Appearances: Appellant in person A L Russell for Crown Judgment: 19 May 2009JUDGMENT OF HON. JUSTICE FRENCH As to Costs[1] The successful respondent in this appeal under s123 of the Human Rights Act 1993 applies for an award of costs against the appellant. [2] In my judgment of 20 April 2009 I expressed the provisional view that costs should follow the event, and that costs be awarded against the appellant on a 2B basis. [3] The parties have not been able to agree on costs, and accordingly I am required to make a decision. [4] The respondent seeks an order for costs on a 2B basis in respect of both the strike out application and the appeal proper. The costs amount to $2800.00 plus disbursements of $1760.30.[5] The appellant, who represented himself, opposes any award being made on the grounds of inability to pay and hardship. In his written submissions on costs, Mr Stoves says that the Registrar has waived the filing fee and setting down fee on the grounds of hardship. [6] It is clear, however, from a "without prejudice save as to costs" letter that the respondent sent to Mr Stoves, that he was well aware of his liability to costs if he persisted with what I found to be a patently unmeritorious appeal. [7] Hardship is a ground for waiving filing fees, because of access to justice issues. However, the position is quite different when it comes to payment of costs by an unsuccessful party to a successful party, particularly in relation to an unmeritorious proceeding. [8] In my view, the costs are payable, and accordingly I order that the appellant pay the respondent costs in the sum of $2800.00 plus disbursements of $1760.30.Solicitors: Appellant, Christchurch Crown Law, Wellington