Three prisoners who claimed their treatment behind bars was cruel and degrading have had their compensation almost halved by the Supreme Court.
Damages of $113,000 awarded them by the High Court in 2005 and confirmed by the Court of Appeal were cut to $59,000 by the decision releasedtoday.
Five prisoners had claimed their treatment under a behaviour management regime (BMR) at Paremoremo Prison, in Auckland, between 1998 and 2004 was disproportionately severe.
One was Christopher Taunoa, serving a life sentence for murdering Sanson publican Hugh Lynch in 1996.
The Supreme Court said although the treatment was unacceptable by human rights standards, it could not be characterised as cruel, degrading or disproportionately severe.
It declined those appeals by majority, with Chief Justice Sian Elias the dissenting voice on the five-judge bench.
In turn, the Attorney-General successfully cross-appealed against the level of damages awarded to three of the prisoners for the breach of their human rights.
Again Dame Sian was a dissenting voice, saying she would not have made any reduction in the awards.
Their treatment was in breach of their rights under the Bill of Rights Act, the judges said.
Taunoa had his damages reduced from $65,000 to $35,000; aggravated robber Alistair Robinson had his lowered from $40,000 to $20,000, and Matthew Kidman from $8000 to $4000.
The inmates were kept in solitary confinement at Paremoremo for extended periods under a regime that denied them regular clothing and bedding changes.
They were made to clean their cell floors, toilets and washbasins with one shared bucket of water and cloth.
When the initial damages were awarded there were suggestions it opened the way for many other inmates to make similar claims.
