Nazi-hunters will continue to press for the extradition of a Perth man for questioning over alleged war crimes.

Charles Zentai, 89, is accused of being one of three Nazi-backed Hungarian soldiers who assaulted and murdered Jewish teenager Peter Balazs in Budapest in November 1944.

In 2005, a Hungarian military judge issued an arrest warrant for Mr Zentai, alleging he captured and assaulted Mr Balazs over several hours before dumping his body in the Danube River.

In July, Federal Court judge Justice Neil McKerracher found the home affairs minister's decision to extradite Mr Zentai to Hungary was beyond his jurisdiction and war crime was not an offence for which he could be surrendered.

Justice McKerracher also found the minister, Brendan O'Connor, failed to properly consider whether it would be "oppressive and incompatible with humanitarian consideration" to extradite Mr Zentai due to his age, ill health and the severity of the sentence he might face.

On Friday, five years after the initial extradition order and after numerous appeals through a host of courts, the judge ordered the government to pay Mr Zentai's court costs.

The Simon Wiesenthal Centre's Israel director Efraim Zuroff said in a statement from Jerusalem the centre would continue pressing for Mr Zentai's extradition to Hungary.

"The centre will do its utmost to help achieve justice in this case. I am in contact with Hungarian Justice Minister Tibor Navracsics, who was indicated that there is no statute of limitations on such crimes and that the request for Zentai's extradition remains in force," Dr Zuroff said.

"During my visit next week to Budapest, I will continue to pursue this matter with the relevant local officials in order to facilitate justice. The Balazs family, Hungarian society, and all persons of morality and conscience deserve no less."

Justice McKerracher ruled on Friday that someone defending assertions made against them but who did not initiate the litigation should not be penalised.

"It may be said [that] in relation to Mr Zentai the extradition proceedings as a whole were originally initiated by the commonwealth and Mr Zentai, in some respects, might be seen as defending his position," the judge said.

Mr Zentai had argued that the "special humanitarian and human rights rights aspects" of his case should weigh heavily in his favour in awarding costs.

He argued that had some of the inquiries and claims made on his behalf been thoroughly addressed by the relevant authorities it would have been unnecessary for him to seek a judicial review.

"The matter was one going to the basic liberty of a long-standing Australia citizen," Justice McKerracher said, outlining Mr Zentai's arguments.

"A proper consideration by the [home affairs minister] might have also made it unnecessary for Mr Zentai to have spent a considerable amount of time in Hakea prison at a time when he suffers serious ill-health and the effects of ageing."

Mr O'Connor told reporters in Canberra he would seek advice on the court orders and would consider an appeal.

"We've got, I think, three weeks for an appeal and I'll be considering that matter properly before I make any public comments," he said.

heraldsun.com.au