Parore v Attorney-General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA ROHE

CIV-2022-485-380

[2023] NZHC 1241

BETWEEN
RICHARD PARORE

Plaintiff

AND

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL

Defendant

On the Papers

Counsel:

D P Weaver and T J Conder for the Plaintiff

A B Goosen and J V Angelson for the Defendant

Judgment:

25 May 2023

COSTS JUDGMENT OF GWYN J

[1] On 1 May 2023 I gave judgment for the applicant in his claim for damages under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.1

[2] Counsel for the parties have now filed a joint memorandum dated 15 May 2023 in which they advise that they have agreed on costs and disbursements.

[3] Accordingly I order by consent that the defendant pay to the plaintiff costs in the sum of $40,988.50, together with disbursements of $10,864.60.

Gwyn J

1 Parore v Attorney-General [2023] NZHC 1010.

PARORE v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2023] NZHC 1241 [25 May 2023]

Solicitors/Counsel
D P Weaver, Barrister, Tauranga Holland Beckett Law, Tauranga Crown Law Office, Wellington
Inland Revenue Legal Services, Dunedin

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand, Wellington Registry, heard a case between Richard Parore, the plaintiff, and the Attorney-General, the defendant. The plaintiff sought damages under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, following a previous judgment in his favour on 1 May 2023. The case was focused on the costs and disbursements that would be awarded to the plaintiff as a result of the proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of the costs and disbursements to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff. The court was tasked with assessing the joint memorandum submitted by the parties on 15 May 2023, which outlined their agreement on the amount of costs and disbursements to be awarded. The court needed to consider whether the agreed amount was reasonable and appropriate given the nature and extent of the litigation.

The court accepted the joint memorandum as reflecting the agreement of the parties on the costs and disbursements. Gwyn J ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiff costs in the sum of $40,988.50, along with disbursements of $10,864.60. The court's decision was based on the consent of the parties, and no further argument or evidence was required. The judgment reflects a resolution of the financial aspects of the litigation between the parties.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established