TANYA FELICITY DUNSTAN v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 1442

TANYA FELICITY DUNSTAN v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 1442 [9 June 2023]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDAUCKLAND REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROATĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHECIV-2023-404-000361[2023] NZHC 1442BETWEEN TANYA FELICITY DUNSTANAppellantAND NEW ZEALAND POLICERespondentCIV-2023-404-000561BETWEEN TANYA FELICITY DUNSTANAppellantAND MANUKAU DISTRICT COURTFirst RespondentNEW ZEALAND POLICESecond RespondentHearing: On the papers at AucklandDate of Minute: 9 June 2023JUDGMENT OF POWELL J[Costs]This judgment was delivered by registrar/deputy registrar on 9 June 2023 at 4.00 pm pursuant toR 11.5 of the High Court Rules..Registrar/Deputy Registrar[1] On 23 May 2023 I observed in my Minute (No.3) that Ms Dunstan's appeals(CIV-2023-404-361 and CIV-2023-404-561) had been abandoned following herfailure to pay her security for costs as directed. In the event Police sought costs, I setout a timetable to enable costs to be determined.[2] Both parties have now filed submissions on costs. The Police seek costs in thesum of $5,258 on a 2B basis, for the steps taken to respond to both appeals before theywere abandoned.[3] Ms Dunstan opposes any award of costs on the basis that the decision imposingsecurity for costs was in error "and failed to award the appellant a right to be heard orfile any supporting evidence for the case to waive any imposed security costs". Inaddition Ms Dunstan opposes the amount of costs sought on behalf of the Police andtakes particular issue with the Police claim for "commencement of response to appeal"in respect of both appeals. Ms Dunstan also raised various matters with regard tocounsel for the Police and his duty to the Court, and concluded her submissions bystating:I continue to seek Justice Powell rescind his decision and grant leave [of whichhe alleged on 30 May 2023 was not required] in order for the Court of Appealto remedy this miscarriage of justice.Costs exceeding the costs initially sought by counsel are clearly an abuse ofcourt processes as a function to further impose financial hardship on victimsof abuse, in breach of natural justice and New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990,s18 and discrimination Human Rights Act 1993, s 21.Discussion[4] Security for costs was imposed in my first Minute issued in respect of thoseappeals and dated 18 April 2023. It cannot be challenged in the context of determiningthe costs payable on the abandoned appeals. Given this position there is no basis forconcluding other than that costs should follow the event,1 namely the abandonment ofthe appeal as a result of a failure to pay security for costs as directed.[5] Having considered Ms Dunstan's submissions I likewise conclude that theamounts sought according to scale are appropriate and observe that the1 High Court Rules 2016, r 14.2(1)(a).commencement of the Police's response to the appeals2 did not require considerationof Ms Dunstan's substantive submissions, which as she notes had not been filed at thetime the appeal was abandoned. There is otherwise no basis for reducing the amountsought, and I therefore conclude judgment should be given for the sum sought by thePolice.[6] Finally, for completeness while Ms Dunstan has referred to seeking leave toappeal the decision imposing security for costs I have been unable to locate any suchapplication on the court file.Decision[7] On the abandonment of appeals CIV-2023-404-361 and CIV-2023-404-561Ms Dunstan is to pay the New Zealand Police costs in the sum of $5,258._______________________________Powell J2 High Court Rules 2016, sch 3.