Angelo v Lehr

[2022] NZHC 3033

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NELSON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHAKATŪ ROHE

CIV-2022-44-13

[2022] NZHC 3033

UNDER

Section 119 of the Residential Tenancies Act

IN THE MATTER

of an appeal from a decision of the District Court

BETWEEN

JOSEPH ANGELO

Appellant

AND

HANS-WERNER LEHR, SILVAIN SCHAEFFER, DOMINIS SINUE GARBEN, HANNE GARBEN & PETER

JENKINS as trustees of THE BIODIVERSITY SONNOS TRUST

Respondents

Hearing:

19 September 2022

Appearances:

Appellant in Person

J Maslin-Caradus for Respondents (via AVL)

Judgment:

18 November 2022

JUDGMENT OF McQUEEN J

[1]                 Mr Angelo appeals against a decision of the District Court dated 25 February 2022.1 This decision dismissed Mr Angelo’s appeal against the decision of the Tenancy Tribunal (the Tribunal) declining to rehear the respondents’ successful application for a possession order of 1891 Takaka-Collingwood Highway, Parapara R D 2, Collingwood (the Property) made under s 65 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).2

1      Angelo v Lehr [2022] NZDC 3185.

2      The respondents are the trustees of the Biodiversity Sonnos Trust. In their submissions, the respondents refer to themselves as “the Trust”. I therefore refer to the respondents as “the Trust”.

ANGELO v HANS-WERNER LEHR & ORS [2022] NZHC 3033 [18 November 2022]

Conduct of the hearing

[2]                 It was anticipated that the hearing of this appeal would be conducted remotely, with Mr Angelo appearing from the Nelson High Court and counsel for the Trust,  Ms Maslin-Caradus, appearing by VMR. In the event, Mr Angelo appeared in person at  the  Wellington  High  Court.   He   was   accompanied   by   a   Mr Ó’Coileáin. Mr Ó’Coileáin expressed his preference to be referred to as G, with no honorific.3 Accordingly, this is how he is referred to throughout the remainder of the judgment.

[3]                 G was present at Court for two reasons. First, because of Mr Angelo’s wish that G be available to give evidence during the hearing, as discussed further below. Secondly, Mr Angelo advised me that G was present to act as Mr Angelo’s “McKenzie friend”, in order to provide him with advice and support.

[4]                 Fairly early in the hearing, although after Mr Angelo had addressed the preliminary evidence issues (discussed below), Mr Angelo asked the Court if G could speak on his behalf as he was finding it difficult to explain his case. I explained that it was only in exceptional circumstances that a McKenzie friend would be permitted to speak for a self-represented litigant.4 I asked Ms Maslin-Caradus whether the Trust had any objection to G taking on this role. The Trust did not object, and accordingly I permitted G to make submissions on behalf of Mr Angelo. Over the course of the hearing, both G and Mr Angelo presented submissions.

Preliminary evidence issue

[5]                 Mr Angelo had indicated in several documents filed with the Court that he wished to adduce further evidence at the hearing of the appeal. In the affidavit he filed on 13 September 2022, Mr Angelo stated that he wanted to call G as a witness…