D v Police HC Wellington CRI-2008-485-139

[2009] NZHC 1690

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CRI-2008-485-139

D

Appellant

v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing:         28 April 2009

Counsel:         K S Grau for respondent

Appellant is person

Judgment:      28 April 2009 at 3.40pm

I direct the Registrar to endorse this judgment with a delivery time of 3.40pm on the

28th day of April 2009.

RESERVED JUDGMENT OF MACKENZIE J

[1]      This is an application under s 144 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal against a judgment of Joseph Williams J delivered on 25 February 2009 dismissing an appeal by the appellant against conviction on one charge of failing to stop at a yellow traffic signal.  Under s 144(2), this Court may grant leave if  in  the opinion  of  this  Court  the  question  of  law involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its general or public importance or

for any other reason, ought to be submitted to the Court of Appeal for decision.

D V NZ POLICE HC WN CRI-2008-485-139  28 April 2009

[2]      The essential issue on the appeal to this Court was whether the appellant could safely have stopped before he entered the intersection on which a yellow light was  showing,  in  terms  of  reg 3.2(4)(a)  of  the  Land  Transport  (Offences  and Penalties) Regulations 1999.  That was clearly a question of fact and no question of law arises.  Necessarily, no question of law of general or public importance arises.

[3]      Mr D   submits that he should not be convicted, because of an error as to the registration number of the vehicle involved.  The Sergeant giving evidence in his evidence in chief referred to the vehicle as having registration AEC642.  Mr D   corrected that at the time and advised the Court that the number plate is not AEC it is AEL.    There  was  no  dispute  that  the  relevant  vehicle  was  that  driven  by  the appellant.   The error in the Sergeant’s evidence in chief does not give rise to any point which would justify an appeal.

[4]      Leave to appeal is accordingly refused.

“A D MacKenzie J”

Solicitors:         Luke Cunningham & Clere for respondent

N D  , Upper Hutt