Cast your mind back to 2012. Remember when RTL challenged the ASC in the High Court, saying they were not supervising the certified consultants properly? Remember how RTL lost and continued to lose all the way to the Supreme Court?

Did you know they were required to pay costs?

We lodged an OIA request to find out what became of that debt to the Crown. A few weeks ago we learned RTL had not paid the $72,500 they owed, but Crown Law had given them a deadline of 31 July 2015.

That date came and went but the debt remained unpaid. Early in August we learned Crown Law gave RTL an extension until 21 August.

That date has come and gone. We are waiting to hear whether RTL has paid yet.

We sent a letter to Justice Minister Hon Amy Adams asking about Crown Law’s policy around debts for costs. She sent us back a polite answer, saying the matter was the responsibility of the Attorney-General, Hon Chris Finlayson.

So where stands the debt now? Has RTL paid the $72.500 they owe? Will they pay interest on the unpaid portion? Starting when? 

We will keep you posted.

UPDATE: RTL Finally Pays its Debts

by Terry Bellamak

Cast your mind back to 2012. Remember when Right to Life challenged the ASC in the High Court, saying they were not supervising the certified consultants properly? Remember how RTL lost and continued to lose all the way to the Supreme Court? Did you know they were required to pay costs?

We lodged an OIA request over a year ago to find out what became of that debt to the Crown. A few weeks ago we learned RTL had not paid the $72,500 they owed, but Crown Law had given them a deadline of 31 July 2015. That date came and went but the debt remained unpaid. Early in August we learned Crown Law gave RTL an extension until 21 August.

Well this time, RTL paid up. Kicking and screaming, bitching and moaning, but they coughed it up. Their media release lamented, “if you dare to seek justice for the unborn then be prepared to face the full force of the State.” RTL asked rhetorically, “Was the Committee (ASC) wishing to give a strong message to discourage any other group of citizens from challenging the system for the legal murder of the unborn?” I’m not the ASC, but I’ll venture an answer on their behalf: No. It’s a strong message that litigants who lose have to pay reasonable costs for folks they dragged to court. The purpose of the rule is to discourage frivolous and vexatious suits.

Meanwhile, we have asked the Justice Minister and Attorney-General, Hon Chris Finlayson to explain their policies around the collection of costs, given RTL was apparently first told of its debt in 2013, and only paid up this month.