Slavich v Collins

Case [2023] NZHC 3651


IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA KIRIKIRIROA ROHE

CIV-2011-419-000463

[2023] NZHC 3651

BETWEEN

JOHN KENNETH SLAVICH

Plaintiff

AND

DAVID BRIAN COLLINS CAMERON LESLIE MANDER CHERYL RAEWYN GWYN

MATTEW SIMON RUSSELL PALMER
First Defendants

CHRISTOPHER FRANCIS FINLAYSON
Second Defendant

REGISTRAR OF WELLINGTON DISTRICT COURT
Third Defendant

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

Fourth Defendant

Hearing: On the papers at Auckland

Judgment:

12 December 2023


JUDGMENT (No.3) OF POWELL J

[Costs]


This judgment was delivered by me on 12 December 2023 at 4.30 pm pursuant to

r 11.5 of the High Court Rules

…………………..

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

JOHN KENNETH SLAVICH v DAVID BRIAN COLLINS [2023] NZHC 3651 [12 December 2023]

[1]    By way of judgment dated 5 September 20231 I struck out Mr Slavich’s application to recall a judgment of Priestley J.2 I awarded costs to the Attorney- General on a 2B basis and indicated if these could not be agreed I would determine costs following the filing of memoranda.3

[2]    Counsel for the Attorney-General have now calculated costs on a 2B basis as being $12,189 and seek judgment for that sum. Mr Slavich opposes the award of costs with reference to other proceedings he has brought in the Court of Appeal. As costs have already been awarded, such submissions are not relevant. No issue has been taken by Mr Slavich with the quantum of the costs calculated, and having checked the calculations I am satisfied that these are properly payable by Mr Slavich.

[3]I therefore order Mr Slavich to pay to the Attorney-General costs in the sum of

$12,189.


Powell J


1      Slavich v Collins [2023] NZHC 2488.

2      Slavich v Collins [2012] NZHC 856.

3      Slavich v Collins, above n 1, at [13].

Details
AGLC
Slavich v Collins [2023] NZHC 3651
Case
[2023] NZHC 3651
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Slavich v Collins involved John Kenneth Slavich, the plaintiff, who sought to recall a judgment previously rendered by Priestley J. The defendants in this case included David Brian Collins, Cameron Leslie Mander, Cheryl Raewyn Gwyn, Matthew Simon Russell Palmer, Christopher Francis Finlayson, the Registrar of Wellington District Court, and the Attorney-General. The High Court of New Zealand, Hamilton Registry, was tasked with deciding the merits of Slavich's application to recall the judgment and the associated costs. The central legal issue was whether Slavich's application to recall the judgment was valid and, if so, the appropriate costs to be awarded to the Attorney-General.

The court addressed the matter of whether the plaintiff's application to recall a prior judgment was justified, and if not, what costs should be awarded to the Attorney-General. Powell J concluded that the application to recall was without merit and had already been struck out. Given the previous order for costs on a 2B basis, the court needed to determine the exact quantum of those costs. The Attorney-General had calculated the costs as $12,189, which Slavich did not dispute in terms of the amount but objected to on the grounds of other ongoing proceedings. The court found that the calculations were correct and thus upheld the awarded costs.

In its judgment, Powell J confirmed the order that Slavich must pay the Attorney-General costs amounting to $12,189. The court emphasised that the costs were already determined and that Slavich's objections based on other proceedings were irrelevant to the matter at hand. The calculations for the costs were verified, and no issues were found with the amount. Consequently, the court upheld the costs as calculated and directed Slavich to pay them to the Attorney-General.

The final orders of the court mandated that John Kenneth Slavich pay the Attorney-General the sum of $12,189 in costs. This amount was a result of the costs already awarded and verified in the judgment.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.