Two defamation suits cost N.Z. $28,000

Press, 12 June 1978, Page 7

Two defamation suits cost N.Z. $28,000

PA Wellington. Taxpayers last year met costs and damages totalling more than $28,000 through court action against two Government Ministers, according to the Controller and AuditorGeneral (Mr A. C. Shailes). Mr Shailes’ annual report, tabled in Parliament, shows $10,279 was paid by the Government to settle a defamation claim against the Minister of Fisheries (Mr Bolger) and SI 7.755 came out of public funds for settlement in a similar action against the Minister of Energv Resources (Mr Gair). In Mr Bolger’s case the settlement amount included $1279 for legal expenses. Mr Shailes said that until recently there had been some uncertainty about the manner in which disclosure of such expenditure should be made. But the Government

had now decided that the following principles should apply:— The costs of the legal representation of the Minister may be charged to the expenditure item "professional and special services” in the relevant vote. If there is no such item, the charge will be to "unauthorised expenditure for services not provided

Any costs of another party awarded against the

Minister are to be charged as above:

Any damages awarded against the Minister are to be charged to “unauthorised expenditure for services not provided for”

except in the event that a special item has already been taken in the estimates of the relevant vote or there is an opportunity to do so:

When costs are awarded in the Minister's favour and he has been represented at the expense of the

Crown, the amount is to be paid into the Public Account.

"The effect of applying these principles is that payments for damages will automatically be disclosed.'' Mr Shades said.

In his report, he noted it was a recognised principle that where a Minister had acted properly in the public interest indemnity at public expense might be provided.

But he contended the new principles to sue for defamation laid down by the Government did not cover the situation which would arise if the Minister were to sue for defamation and be awarded damages.

“The question which has yet to be determined is whether, in those circumstances, the Minister should be assisted, and whether any damages awarded would be paid into the public Account,” Mr Shailes said.