Taylor v Attorney-General

[2023] NZHC 2718

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

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

CIV-2017-485-802

[2023] NZHC 2718

BETWEEN

ARTHUR WILLIAM TAYLOR

Plaintiff

AND

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

Defendant

Counsel:

Plaintiff self-represented

S M Kinsler and D M A Wiseman for Defendant

Judgment:

28 September 2023

JUDGMENT (No 4) OF ISAC J

[Costs]

Introduction

[1]                  In this proceeding Mr Arthur Taylor brought wide ranging claims against the Department of Corrections in relation to his treatment as an inmate between June 2011 and March 2018. The claims were almost all advanced as breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and included allegations of inadequate standards of detention, failures to provide appropriate opportunities for rehabilitation, and an occasion where he was said to have been assaulted by prison staff and transferred to another prison unlawfully. Mr Taylor sought a host of declarations and public law damages totalling

$1.45 million.

[2]                  My substantive judgment of 30 November 2022 addressed Mr Taylor’s claims in six chapters, following the way in which the parties had approached the case at

TAYLOR v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2023] NZHC 2718 [28 September 2023]

trial.1 Overall, Mr Taylor succeeded wholly or in part on some of his claims but failed entirely in respect of others.

[3]                  The Attorney-General now seeks costs against Mr Taylor. It is submitted that Mr Taylor enjoyed very limited success in the context of his claim. Ultimately, it is said, the judgment represented a substantially worse outcome for Mr Taylor compared to a Calderbank offer made to him by the defendant in a letter of 18 February 2022. Despite the offer, Mr Taylor elected to persevere with his claims in a lengthy contested civil trial, resulting in significant unnecessary costs to the defendant. The Attorney- General submits that on a realistic appraisal it was the substantially successful party, and seeks costs totalling $204,178.16. That figure represents scale costs on a 2B basis, with uplifts in relation to certain steps:2

(a)$12,625.42, representing 2B costs for Chapters One, Two, Four and Six up until 18 February 2022 when the Calderbank offer was made;

(b)$76,699.38, representing 2B costs with a 50 per cent uplift for Chapters One, Two, Four and Six for the period after the Calderbank offer; and

(c)$114,853.36, representing 2B costs with a 50 percent uplift across the duration of the litigation for Chapter Five.3

[4]The Crown also seeks to recover disbursements of $54,078.85.

[5]                  Mr Taylor opposes the costs application, saying that the sums sought are excessive, unjustified, and designed to have a chilling effect on prospective plaintiffs. He says that any costs award should reflect both the considerable public interest in the proceeding, and the various issues that he was successful on. Mr Taylor denies acting

1      Taylor v Attorney-General (No 3) [2022] NZHC 3170 (re-issued on 5 December 2022).

2      No claim is made for costs in respect of Chapter Three, in which Mr Taylor successfully challenged the ban of the Truth newspaper in Auckland prison in 2011 as an unjustified…