Prison lawyer meets his match

Convicted murderer and prolific jail lawyer Richard Genge has met his match.

It’s called security for costs. Genge wanted to appeal a costs judgment of $22,087 made against him by the High Court in February. He intended to argue he could not afford to pay as he earned only $2.70 a week.

The inmate of 24 years – who is serving a life sentence for the murder and rape of 22-year-old Christchurch woman Anne Maree Ellens in the grounds of Christchurch East School in 1994 – is a frequent litigant. Last year alone he lost four civil judgments and several applications for habeas corpus.

He has several actions pending.

The Court of Appeal registrar set the amount Genge had to pay to the court as security for his appeal against the costs judgment at $6600.

Genge applied for a dispensation, but the registrar refused because she was unable to establish if he was broke.

She also said that even if he was broke, the potential benefits of his appeal outweighed the costs, plus it raised no matters of public interest and its merits were weak.

Genge asked the Court of Appeal to review her decision.

Justice Murray Gilbert said the test was whether a ‘‘solvent appellant would reasonably wish to prosecute the appeal’’.

A failure to seek legal aid was relevant, he said, but Genge mistrusted lawyers and believed his legal representation had been inadequate.

Justice Gilbert said the appeal had little prospect of succeeding and the fact Genge was unable to meet the costs was not normally relevant.

He therefore agreed with the registrar.