Dunstan v Riddell

[2021] NZCA 469

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

 CA406/2021
 [2021] NZCA 469

BETWEEN	TANYA FELICITY DUNSTAN Appellant
AND	CHRISTINA RIDDELL Respondent

CA417/2021
BETWEEN	TANYA FELICITY DUNSTAN Appellant
AND	ATTORNEY-GENERAL Firs Respondent MANUKAU COURT Second Respondent

Counsel:	Appellant in person No appearance for Respondents
Judgment: (On the papers)	15 September 2021 at 2.30 pm

JUDGMENT OF COLLINS J
(Review of Deputy Registrar’s decision)

The application for a review of the Deputy Registrar’s decision is declined.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

1. On 13 August 2021, I delivered a judgment declining Ms Dunstan’s application to review the decision of the Deputy Registrar declining to accept a promissory note as payment for security for costs in these appeals.[1]

   [1]Dunstan v Riddell [2021] NZCA 378.

2. In an email to the Deputy Registrar, Ms Dunstan has asked I recall my judgment, saying it contains errors, including that it constitutes “a breach of fair trading and an act of discrimination against” Ms Dunstan.

3. The Deputy Registrar declined to accept Ms Dunstan’s email as an application for recall and informed her she needed to make an application that complied with r 8A of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 (the Rules) and pay a filing fee of $400.  To assist Ms Dunstan, the Deputy Registrar forwarded her a template application that she could easily complete.

4. Ms Dunstan has now sought a review of the Deputy Registrar’s decision. 

5. If Ms Dunstan wishes to apply to have me recall my judgment she must comply with the Rules and file an application that complies with r 8A and pay the prescribed filing fee.

6. The application for a review of the Deputy Registrar’s decision is declined.