Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
High Court of New Zealand Decisions |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV 2008-485-1603 UNDER the Judicature Act 1908, Section 69 Trial at Bar IN THE MATTER OF The Judicature Amendment Act 1972, The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, The Crimes Act 1961, The Crown Proceedings Act 1950, the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908, The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, The Corrections Act 2004, Corrections Regulations 2005, and other Institutional Legislation and Policies, and Common Law BETWEEN ALAN IVO GREER Plaintiff AND THE PRISON MANAGER AT RIMUTAKA PRISON First Respondent Counsel: A I Greer in Person V Casey and H McLachlan for Respondents Judgment: 20 February 2009 JUDGMENT AS TO COSTS OF RONALD YOUNG J [1] On 10 December 2008 I heard Mr Greer's proceedings involving judicial review and public law compensation arising from decision made by prison authorities relating to Mr Greer's laptop, access to a prison computer, a prison management plan as well as disputes about documentation. All of Mr Greer's claims failed for reasons identified in my Judgment dated 18 December 2009. At the final paragraph of my Judgment I invited submissions on costs from the respondents within fourteen days and Mr Greer's reply within a further fourteen days. ALAN IVO GREER V THE PRISON MANAGER AT RIMUTAKA PRISON HC WN CIV 2008-485-1603 20 February 2009 [2] Counsel for the respondent filed their memorandum on 16 January 2009. The date is well past for Mr Greer to file submission in response. I record that the court staff have rung prison authorities during February 2009 to remind Mr Greer of his opportunity to respond to submissions from the respondent on costs. Once again Mr Greer has chosen not to respond. [3] There is no reason why the respondent should not have costs on Mr Greer's unsuccessful proceedings. The respondents seek an order for costs on the 2B basis plus disbursements for one counsel only, although I record two counsel appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied the respondent should have costs on a 2B basis plus disbursements. As the respondent's identified the application was wholly unsuccessful. It involved litigation against seven respondents, including a number of individual prison officers and the Inspector of Prisons. In addition there were a large number of interlocutory applications the respondents were faced with responding to. [4] Accordingly, I approve costs on a 2B basis plus disbursements as identified in the Schedule to the respondents' submission. __________________________ Ronald Young J Solicitors: Crown Law Office, PO Box 2858, Wellington, email: charlotte.griffin@crownlaw.govt.nz A I Greer, Rimutaka Prison, Private Bag 47901, Trentham, Upper Hutt
NZLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZHC/2009/182.html