Colman v Attorney-General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

CIV-2011-488-723
CIV-2011-488-724
CIV-2011-488-726

CIV-2011-488-727 [2012] NZHC 1670

BETWEEN JOHN COLMAN Appellant

ANDTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL Respondent

Hearing: By memoranda

Counsel: Appellant in person
J Catran for Respondent

Judgment: 12 July 2012

JUDGMENT OF LANG J [on costs]

This judgment was delivered by me on 12 July 2012 at 4 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date……………

JOHN COLMAN V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL HC WHA CIV-2011-488-723 [12 July 2012]

[1] On 14 June 2012, I dismissed seven appeals filed by Mr Colman against orders made by Judge de Ridder striking out proceedings in the District Court.[1] I allowed one appeal, in CIV-2011-088-195, and reserved the issue of costs.

[1] Colman v The Attorney-General [2012] NZHC 1343 HC Whangarei CIV-2011-488-723, 14 June 2012.

[2] The parties have been unable to reach agreement regarding that issue. For that reason I am now required to determine it.

[3] The general principle is that the unsuccessful party should be required to contribute to the costs of the successful party.[2] The Attorney-General was clearly the successful party in this case, because he succeeded in respect of seven of the eight appeals. For that reason I am satisfied Mr Colman should be required to contribute to the Attorney-General’s costs.

[2] High Court Rules, r 14.2(a).

[4] Costs on a Category 2B basis amount to $2,632.00. The Attorney-General has also incurred disbursements totalling $1,418.89, although I note that a GST component has been added to these and I am not sure whether that is appropriate.

[5] I propose to make an allowance for the fact that Mr Colman succeeded in relation to one appeal. I propose to do this by reducing the award of costs in favour of the Attorney-General by 15 per cent.

[6] The Attorney-General is accordingly entitled to costs as claimed in his counsel’s memorandum dated 4 July 2012 less 15 per cent. Counsel for the Attorney-General is also to provide the Registrar with supporting receipts to confirm
the expenditure on disbursements.

Lang J

Solicitors:
Crown Law, Wellington
Copy to: Appellant

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand heard an appeal from John Colman against the Attorney-General regarding costs in seven appeals. These appeals were dismissed, with one exception, and the matter was brought before the court to determine the issue of costs. The general principle applied in such cases is that the unsuccessful party should bear the costs of the successful party. The Attorney-General emerged as the successful party in this instance, having prevailed in seven out of eight appeals. Therefore, the court ruled that Mr Colman should contribute to the costs incurred by the Attorney-General.

The court assessed the costs based on Category 2B, amounting to $2,632.00, and noted additional disbursements of $1,418.89. The court also considered the possibility of adjusting these costs to reflect Mr Colman's partial success in one appeal. Consequently, the court decided to reduce the awarded costs by 15% to account for this partial success. The court instructed the Attorney-General's counsel to provide receipts to substantiate the disbursements claimed.

In conclusion, the court ruled that the Attorney-General is entitled to the costs claimed in the memorandum dated 4 July 2012, reduced by 15%, along with the disbursements, subject to the provision of supporting receipts. The final order directed Mr Colman to contribute to these costs, reflecting the court's decision on the matter.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established