PREPOSTEROUS COSTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19142, 7 October 1925, Page 14

PREPOSTEROUS COSTS.

| mangawara drainage case CHIEF JUSTICE'S COMMENT. FULL FEES FOR BRIEF SITTINGS. [BY TELEGRAPH.—PRESS ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON. Tuesday. During the hearing cf the appeal by Edward Charles Pilkington against the decision of Mr. Justice Herdman regarding the Mangawara Drainage Commission there was a somewhat heated argument on the subject of costs. The Chief Justice asked: "How are those costs made up?" Mr. N. Johnson, of Hamilton, who was appearing for respondents, replied that "they were assessed on, shall we say, the maximum scale." The Chief Justice: They are preposterous. Counsel is allowed six guineas for preparing his brief, etc., and 15 guineas per day as a maximum charge in these cases. It is expected that ho shall attend Court and present pleadings. In this case the Court was adjourned after a few minutes on one day, and when it met f next day the sitting lasted only a couple of hour# at the most. Yet 50 guineas was allowed to counsel. "I submit. Your Honor," said Mr. Johnson, "that the question of the amuunt awarded does not concern the Court. I submit further, however, that if a case lasts only five minutes counsel is entitled to claim full costs." The Chief Justice, warmly: Although this Court is not called upon to discuss the question of costs, 1 say that in this case costs allowed are on a scale with the scandalous manner in which the whole matter has been conducted. At the conclusion of argument on behalf of respondents, the Court intimated that it was unnecessary to hear appellants, as decision must be given in their favour. In giving his decision, the Chief Justice stated that, as the commission had not been regularly called, appellant could not be held liable for ths costs thereof. As for the costs themselves, the scale on which these were allowed seemed to him extraordinary. One hundred and fifty pounds had been awarded, a further irregularity being that these had been fixed in the Magistrate's Court, which, according to Statute, could not provide for a sum of more than £IOO. The appeal must therefore be allowed. Mr. Justice Sim, Mr. Justice Adams and Mr. Justice Reed agreed in the decision.