1 I am satisfied that in this case costs ought to be awarded in favour of the defendants against the plaintiff. As I have said, I consider each of the proceedings was unmeritorious. I have gone beyond the normal limited review in proceedings of this sort to address the merits of the matters and have found that in each instance they are not made out. This is not a case of simply a technical failing on behalf of the plaintiff. I consider his complaints in each instance were unmeritorious.

[4]

2 Next, I consider it is not unfair to make the Order. Whilst I agree with Mr Knight that he was unrepresented, he is in custody and he is on a long-term sentence, nonetheless he made the considered decision to proceed and in my view the ordinary rule should apply. I consider that ordinary tax-payers should not be fixed with the burden of these proceedings. Accordingly, in each instance I order that the costs of the proceedings of the respective defendants be paid by the plaintiff.

Parties

Applicant/Plaintiff:

# Knight

Respondent/Defendant:

Minister for Corrections

Knight v Minister for Corrections - [2003] VSC 413 - VSC 2003 case summary — Zoe