Judge orders lawyers to pay court costs out of their own pocket
Two Auckland lawyers have been given leave to appeal against an order for them personally to pay costs in a court proceeding.
Last October Justice Rhys Harrison told Frank Deliu and Evgeny Orlov he was making them jointly and severally liable for another lawyer’s fees in a family court matter.
In the same judgment, Justice Harrison declined an application for him to recuse himself, or stand aside on the costs determination.
Justice Harrison suppressed details of the matter under the Children, Young Persons and their Families Act. However, a brief outline can be gleaned from a subsequent Supreme Court ruling and Court of Appeal judgment last week which contained no such prohibition.
The Supreme Court said that Justice Harrison had ordered the pair to pay the costs of counsel for the children “in the amount of $11,125, which the High Court found had been wasted by their conduct.”
The Court of Appeal noted that Justice Harrison held the men personally liable to pay indemnity costs of that amount.
Orders for lawyers to personally pay costs in cases in which they were involved are extremely rare.
Messrs Orlov and Deliu, who are both from overseas, asked the judge to step aside. But he refused and hit them up for $11,125 in indemnity costs.
Costs are awarded on an indemnity basis where a party is considered by a judge to have acted vexatiously, frivolously, improperly or unnecessarily in starting or continuing a proceeding.
Most Popular
Sponsored Links
- Talk to FleetPartners now and make the right decision about your vehicle fleet solution.
- Meet the SpaceseatTM, a new way to fly long-haul with Air NZ from November 2010
- Aviemore: " Grab an exclusive lake frontage land in South Island"
- Get your business banking up and running with Bizpac Essentials. Click here to find out more.
- Get 2.99%p.a. for 6 months on balances transferred to The Warehouse Rewards MasterCard. Conditions apply
.jpg)
Latest
- Cruise ship company expands into NZ
The good, the bad and the ugly - NBR 24/7's plays of the week- $19m claim but can Bill Birnie pay the bill?
- Bank seeks to liquidate Heatley-linked company
- What role for Auckland in primary economy?
- Jade’s profit slumps, but new product on the way
- Rich Listers and their ways
- Fletcher gears up for volume bounce-back
- Economy not much better than households think
- Telecom shares hit new low, but worse to come - analysts
NBR Services
.jpg)
Comments
Excellent!
Will the same judge have a look at all the ERA cases and stop the gravy train for lawyers that was provided by the Labour government as a sop for the Unions so the Unions and Labour can cosy up closer together as they attempt to claim the moral high ground by "defending" worker rights!
Would the NZ law Society / EMA please stop the rampant unethical treatment of NZ business owners by the ERA!
Plenty of examples of ERA / Labour philosophies completely frustrating many business's at all levels!
A rare event
when a lawyer has to put his hand in his own pocket..
Give that Judge a spot in the Supreme Court!
What a brave guy, good for you! Lawyers are the scourge of any country as a general rule. Using the "law" to twist things for the gain of their client. Truth and Law cannot go hand in hand in Court either it does not seem.
LEGAL THEFT!
Hear! Hear! Mr Judge after paying $60000 for a child custody battle which was dragged out for 9months, i concur with the judges ultimatum, pay up and make it snappy, we are all victims of legal gougers,especially when the question should be for most family court lawyers", WHY ARE YOU ALL SO EXPENSIVE"?.
You want to pay peanuts?
...then expect a monkey. there are plenty of them around in the legal profession.
monkey lawyers.
They are all monkeys so peanuts is in order.
Why would the Court of Appeal give leave?
Seems to me the lawyers have an arguable case that they were wrongly ordered to pay costs - no way the Court of Appeal would go against a High Court Justice otherwise...
Ummm... following your
Ummm... following your logic, only cases which would clearly win on appeal would end up in our superior courts...
costs against lawyers
what the media doe not reveal is that the costs were awarded by justuce harriosn ona pro bono (for free ) case that the lawyers were doing fora family couple who had thier children removed without a hearing .
It is only human rights lawyers who work for free who get costs awared against them
costs against lawyers
The last comment could only have come from one of the lawyers involved - it is such a nonsense. It's about time the Courts at all levels dealing with these guys started imposing costs for the time they waste. Have a look at some of their other cases and the comments made by the Judiciary having to hear them. They're frankly an embarrassment to the profession, and it's time they were taken to task.
I agree with the last
I agree with the last comment in its entirety.. working pro bono is no excuse for sloppy work and wasting the court's time ..
Are judges perfect?
Is the justice system perfect?
WTHRS - PEAR REVIEW OR SIMILAR
JUST A GOD DAM SHAME SUCH REAL WORLD DECISIONS ARE NOT MADE MORE OFTEN AND IN OTHER COURTS! MAYBE THIS IS THE BEGINING AND SIAN ELIAS MAIGHT CONCENTRATE HER POWERS OF OBSERVATION IN THESE AREAS AS WELL AND APPLY EQUALLY MORE REAL WORLD JUSTICE?
Visit http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz/
http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz/
Family Court
The REAL name of the family court is the 'BROKEN family court'. The lawyers drag things out as long as they can so they make more money from you. Beware of them.... When I got angy, after 2 years, it took 3 days to finalize things.
ANZA Distributing New
ANZA Distributing New Zealand Ltd (in Liquidation) v USG Interiors Pacific Ltd (No 2) 18/9/09, Cooper J, HC Auckland CIV-2007-404-3474
A Supreme Court Justice was held to have been apparently biased
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10612190
Post new comment