Fazly v Minister of Immigration

[2017] NZHC 1146

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2016-404-001631 [2017] NZHC 1146

BETWEEN

MOHAMMED TASLIM FAZLY

Plaintiff

AND

MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION Defendant

Hearing:	On the papers
Counsel:	M S S Khan for Applicant M J R Conway for Respondent
Judgment:	30 May 2017

JUDGMENT No 2 OF PALMER J (COSTS)

This judgment is delivered by me on 30 May 2017 at 12.30 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

..................................................... Registrar / Deputy Registrar

Solicitors/Counsel:

Singhs Solicitors, Auckland

Crown Law, Wellington

FAZLY v MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION [2017] NZHC 1146 [30 May 2017]

[1]      On 7 February 2017 I issued judgment in Fazly v Minister of Immigration.1

I awarded costs to the Crown on a 1B basis.2

[2]      Ms Conway, for the Crown, submits costs should be awarded on a 2B basis, which is what the parties had previously categorised it as, by joint memorandum. The Crown also seeks disbursements.

[3]      Mr  Singh,  for  Mr  Fazly,  submits  the  Crown  should  have  appealed  the judgment if it was not satisfied with the costs award.  It did not.  I note, though, that Mr Fazly effectively did, unsuccessfully.3   The Court of Appeal awarded costs on the

equivalent  of  a  2A  basis  with  disbursements.4    The  Court  of  Appeal  has  no

equivalent to category 1.

[4]      For the purposes of costs in the High Court, category 1 proceedings are “of a straightforward nature able to be conducted by counsel considered junior in the High Court”.   Category 2 proceedings are “of average complexity requiring counsel of skill and experience considered average in the High Court”.

[5]      Even if I have jurisdiction to revisit the judgment I would not change my assessment of these proceedings as being of a straightforward nature.  I confirm the award of costs on a 1B basis.  But I do direct the payment of the usual disbursements sought by the Crown, amounting to $1,278.76.

..................................................................

Palmer J

1      Fazly  v  Minister  of  Immigration  [2017]  NZHC  89.     I  regret  that  Mr  Fazly’s  name  was inaccurately spelt as “Fazley” in that judgment.

2 At [30].

3      Fazly v Minister of Immigration [2017] NZCA 218.

4 At [15].