Siemer v Registrar of the Supreme Court

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].

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Siemer v Registrar of the Supreme Court, Vincent Ross Siemer, the applicant, contested the costs order against him in relation to an application that was struck out as an abuse of process. The matter was before the High Court of New Zealand at Wellington Registry. The central legal issue before the court was the assessment of costs, including whether the usual rule of costs following an unsuccessful application should apply and if the proceeding lacked merit and public interest.

The court acknowledged the discretionary nature of all matters relating to costs, which must be exercised on a principled basis and be predictable and expeditious. The court found that the proceeding was a clear abuse of process, lacking any merit or public interest element, as it was a re-packaging of a claim that had previously been struck out. Consequently, the court determined that the usual rule of costs should apply, where the unsuccessful party should bear the costs of the successful party.

Following this reasoning, the court awarded costs to the respondent on a 1B basis, along with disbursements amounting to $5,602. The court’s decision was based on the lack of merit and public interest in the proceeding and the principle that unsuccessful parties should bear the costs of successful parties in such cases.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established