A New Zealand man who felt that a sex worker violated the country’s Consumer Guarantees Act by not completing a sex spray with him has had his ensuing law suit thrown out of court for insufficient evidence.
The customer and the prostitute who were identified as Mr N and Ms N in court documents had been involved in a two-month sexual arrangement when their last encounter ended in a quarrel at a brothel in February 2012. Ms N said she had attempted to return Mr N’s money and a mobile phone he had given her to set up their weekly meetings, but he refused.
Mr N then sued for $70,000 in compensation and damages, claiming that Ms N had “gained unjust enrichment” and violated consumer laws. An infuriated Justice Peter Woodhouse dismissed Mr N’s claim, calling it a “sinister use of the court’s processes”.
“Not only am I satisfied the proceedings are frivolous but I also believe they are vexatious,” the judge said. A doubly unhappy ending for Mr N in this case, it seems.
When News Breaks Out, We Break In. Minute by Minute Report on Cameroon and Africa