Siemer v Registrar of the Supreme Court

Case

[2021] NZHC 1951

30 July 2021

No judgment structure available for this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

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

CIV-2021-485-125

[2021] NZHC 1951

BETWEEN

VINCENT ROSS SIEMER

Applicant

AND

REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT

Respondent

Hearing: On the papers

Counsel:

Applicant in Person

G M Taylor and R M McMenamin for Respondent

Judgment:

30 July 2021


JUDGMENT OF ISAC J (COSTS)


Introduction

[1]    In a judgment of 1 July 2021 I struck out this proceeding under r 15.1 of the High Court Rules 2016 on the basis it constituted an abuse of process.1 I Invited memoranda as to costs from the  respondent  within  10  working  days  and  from Mr Siemer within 10 working days thereafter.2

[2]    The respondent filed a memorandum on 9 July 2021 seeking costs and disbursements on a 1B basis.

[3]    A reminder email was sent by the Registrar to Mr Siemer, but no memorandum has been received from him.


1      Siemer v Registrar of the Supreme Court [2021] NZHC 1604.

2      At [36]–[37].

SIEMER v REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT [2021] NZHC 1951 [30 July 2021]

Discussion

[4]    All matters relating to costs are discretionary.3 The discretion must be exercised on a principled basis. And the determination of costs, so far as possible, should be both predictable and expeditious.4

[5]    I see no reason to depart from the usual course that the party who fails with respect to a proceeding or an interlocutory application should pay costs to the party who succeeds.5

[6]    The proceeding clearly lacked merit. I found that it was a quintessential abuse of process, as Mr Siemer had simply re-packaged and re-filed a claim in the Wellington Registry that had been struck out by the High Court in Auckland.6 There was equally no public interest element to the proceeding.

Result

[7]    Costs are awarded to the respondent on a 1B basis together with disbursements, totalling $5,602.

Isac J

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent


3      High Court Rules, r 14.1.

4      Rule 14.2(1)(g).

5      Rule 14.2(1)(a).

6      Siemer v Registrar of the Supreme Court, above n 1, at [22]–[23].

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

0