SMITH V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL CA CA555/2008
Although the appellant achieved slight success on the law concerning Crown obligations to prisoners, the court exercised its discretion to make no order for costs because the appellant is a long-term prisoner and there is no practical prospect of securing payment.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- openlaw-3c955dea_91bf_49db_9f61_819571ccf4cb.pdf
- Parties
- Appellant: Philip Smith; Respondent: The Attorney-General
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 30 July 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Costs Decision
- Outcome
- No order for costs
- Legal Topics
- Crown Obligations to Prisoners, Costs, Enforcement of Costs
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Philip Smith
Appellant
The Attorney-General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a costs order should be made following the appeal decision
- 2 Whether the appellant's limited success entitles him to costs
- 3 Whether the appellant's status as a long-term prisoner and lack of practical prospect of payment justifies withholding costs
Ratio Decidendi
Although the appellant achieved slight success on the law concerning Crown obligations to prisoners, the court exercised its discretion to make no order for costs because the appellant is a long-term prisoner and there is no practical prospect of securing payment.
Court Disposition
No order for costs
Orders
- No order for costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
SMITH V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL CA CA555/2008 30 July 2010IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA555/2008 [2010] NZCA 336BETWEEN PHILIP SMITH Appellant AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL Respondent Hearing: 20 May 2010 Court: Hammond, Arnold and Baragwanath JJ Counsel: T Ellis and G Edgeler for Appellant C J Curran for Respondent Judgment: 30 July 2010 at 11 amJUDGMENT OF THE COURT (NO. 2) (COSTS)There will be no order for costs.REASONS OF THE COURT(Given by Hammond J) [1] We delivered a judgment in this proceeding on 23 June 2010. 1 At [92] we reserved costs. [2] We have now had memoranda from counsel.1 Smith v Attorney-General [2010] NZCA 258.[3] There will be no order for costs. First, Mr Smith enjoyed some, albeit slight, success in a matter of the law relating to Crown obligations to prisoners. Second, Mr Smith is a long-term serving prisoner. There is no practical prospect of securing payment.Solicitors: Nat Dunning Law, Wellington for Appellant Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent