BETWEEN NEIL MARTIN CLARKE Applicant AND THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Respondent

[2023] NZHC 2982

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE

CIV-2023-463-78

[2023] NZHC 2982

UNDER

the Habeas Corpus Act 2001

IN THE MATTER

of an application for a writ of habeas corpus

BETWEEN

NEIL MARTIN CLARKE

Applicant

AND

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Respondent

Hearing:

On the papers

Counsel:

Applicant in person

C A Bourke for Respondent

Judgment:

25 October 2023

JUDGMENT OF HARVEY J

[on sixth application for writ of habeas corpus]

This judgment was delivered by me on 25 October 2023 at 1.30 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Date: …………………..

(Deputy) Registrar

Solicitors/Counsel:
Pollett Legal, Tauranga

Copy to:
Mr N M Clarke

CLARKE v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2023] NZHC 2982 [25

October 2023]

[1]        Neil Clarke has filed what appears to be his sixth application seeking a writ of habeas corpus. This present application was received by email yesterday 24 October 2023 at 2.23 pm and was referred to me by the Deputy Registrar at 3.50 pm.

[2]        Mr Clarke’s application is dated 5 October 2023 and appears to be largely a copy of his earlier applications. Those previous applications were dismissed by Tahana J,1 Brewer J2 and Lang J.3

[3]        In his decision of 25 September 2023, Lang J confirmed that the habeas corpus procedure is not available for any “review” of the Tauranga District Court and Family Court files as requested by Mr Clarke to determine whether a protection order has been validly pursued. Lang J also underscored that he had made it clear in his decision of 8 September 2023 that Mr Clarke is subject to warrants remanding him in custody until 10 October 2023. He then dismissed the application for a writ of habeas corpus as an abuse of the Court’s process.

[4]        As 10 October 2023 has now passed, I directed the Deputy Registrar to update me urgently as to what, if anything, occurred on that date. I am now informed that the matter has been rescheduled to 20 November next.

[5]        In the meantime, I see no reason why the current application should remain extant for the same reasons articulated by Lang J in his earlier decisions. It is dismissed per s 15(1) of the Habeas Corpus Act 2001.

Harvey J

1      Clarke v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2023] NZHC 2052.

2      Clarke v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2023] NZHC 2153.

3      Clarke v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2023] NZHC 2527; [2023] NZHC 2671; [2023] NZHC 2826.