The poison drop took place in 2017, but the court proceedings levied by the Brook Valley Community Group were only resolved in late 2019.

The Brook Valley Community Group is asking the Nelson City Council not to liquidate it to recover court costs because it has no money, and wants to continue representing residents.

In a public submission to the council's audit, risk and finance committee, the group's lawyer Sue Grey said the group admitted it could not pay its court costs from its failed opposition to the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary poison drop. But she said disbanding the group would not see the council gain any money as it had a "balance of something like $27.13 in the bank".

"Whether it's liquidated or not, it's got no money," she said.

"The issue is whether the council should support the continued existence of the Brook Valley Community Group, Incorporated, so it can represent the views of that part of Nelson in the Brook Valley."

READ MORE:

* Brook Valley group down but not out after Supreme Court dismissal

* Councillors want to chase Brook Valley Group court debt

* Brook Valley group not ruling out disbanding to avoid court costs

Group member Christopher St Johanser said in a public Facebook post that even if the society was liquidated, its members could not be prevented from being an informal group.

The council is seeking to liquidate the community group to recover $37,375.68 in court costs. It was awarded the sum after the group took their opposition to a 2017 brodifacoum poison drop in the sanctuary to the High Court, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court in years-long litigation processes.

MARION VAN DIJK Brook Valley Community Group lawyer Sue Grey said the council could expect no money from the group, but said it should be allowed to continue to represent the community's views.

Nelson City Council group manager of corporate services Nikki Harrison said the council had incurred costs over $100,000 responding to the Brook Valley Community Group legal action, and had applied for the group to be liquidated as a last chance to recover what had been awarded to them.

"This is in response to the group's refusal to pay the sum of $37,375.68 that was awarded to the council by the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court during the period of 2017 to 2019," she said in a statement.

"It is in the Nelson ratepayer's best interests to take all available steps to seek to recover the costs awarded to [the council]. Following refusal by the group to respond to council's requests for payment, the only remaining option for council is to apply for liquidation of the group under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908, and this has been done."

The courts ultimately awarded court costs to the city council, the sanctuary, and the Minister for the Environment totalling more than $70,000.

MARTIN DE RUYTER Nelson City Council hopes to recover some of the more than $100,000 costs spent in the Brook Valley litigation.

Grey said the group had made no secret of its finances or lack thereof throughout the legal proceedings.

"The court recognised throughout the proceedings firstly that the Brook Valley Community Group didn't have money, and gave waivers on all the filing fees and the like, and the Court of Appeal gave a discount on the security of the costs ... in recognition that access to justice should prevail over financial affluence."

She also said that the council itself had voluntarily joined in the legal proceedings, as the group had not initially taken any action against the it.

"The Brook Valley Community Group didn't take legal action against the council, but it did give information about those proceedings to the council, and the council chose to join those proceedings and the Brook Valley Community Group consented to that because [it] recognised that the council had an interest representing the community."

LUZ ZUNIGA Sue Grey said the group also represented public interest protesting "the effective privatisation" of the Brook Sanctuary, which is using entrance fees to help fund the reintroduction of native species.

Grey said the group performed an important role representing members of the community on many issues of public interest, including making submissions to council annual plan proceedings, representing Brook Motor Camp residents faced with eviction, and giving critical feedback on various plans for recreation areas.

"Does this community have an opportunity to have its representation the way it's been done in the past, or will that be squashed and they will be disengaged from the council processes?

"In my submission it is a matter of law the council's got an obligation to promote the community's future engagement, and just as a matter of equity and justice and community-wellbeing the council similarly has that obligation."

MARION VAN DIJK Christopher St Johanser in 2016, protesting against the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary poison drop. He says even dissolution by the court would not stop group members being "a society".

On the group's public Facebook page St Johanser said he expected to know the outcome of the committee's private debate by February 27.

"Either the High Court proceeding continues or it does not, and we shall know that, of necessity, quite soon."

He said that the "very worst" the High Court could do would be to order the dissolution of the incorporated society.

"It can have nothing to say about the continuing existence of a group, a society - employing the Companies Office terminology - not incorporated but a quintessential element of the public's right to free assembly. BVCG might lose the power to engage in litigation (unless members thought fit to fund it), but its existence is not in peril."