Grant v Minister of Justice

[2021] NZHC 740

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NELSON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHAKATŪ ROHE

CIV-2021-442-014

[2021] NZHC 740

UNDER

the Habeas Corpus Act 2011

IN THE MATTER OF

an application for a writ of habeas corpus

BETWEEN

SAMANTHA JANE GRANT

Applicant

AND

MINISTER OF JUSTICE

Respondent

On the papers:

Counsel:

Applicant in Person

M McKillop and C Tocher for Respondent

Judgment:

1 April 2021

JUDGMENT OF JUSTICE CHURCHMAN

[1]        On 26 March 2021, the applicant filed in the High Court at Nelson a document described as “application for a writ of habeas corpus”.

[2]        The document had been prepared by the applicant herself and was difficult to understand.

[3]        The application came before Grice J on 26 March 2021. Grice J issued a minute which noted that it appeared that the applicant was not presently detained and that the application she had filed appeared in reality to be in the nature of an appeal from a refusal to grant habeas corpus by Cooke J on 6 November 2020.

GRANT v MINISTER OF JUSTICE [2021] NZHC 740 [1 April 2021]

[4]        The applicant was directed to file a memorandum clarifying the nature of her application and to specify what present detention it related to.

[5]The applicant filed a memorandum on 30 March 2021. It is incomprehensible.

[6]        The respondent filed a memorandum on 1 April 2021. That memorandum noted that the applicant was not presently detained in custody and had in fact hand delivered the application to the Office of the Crown Solicitor at Nelson on 26 March 2021.

[7]        The respondent’s memorandum noted that the application appeared to be a collateral attack on a protection order that the applicant had been convicted of breaching. The memorandum also noted that the applicant had been convicted of three counts of contravening a protection order and one count of wilful damage, and that an appeal in respect of these convictions was to be heard in the Nelson High Court on 28 April 2021.

Analysis

[8]Section 6 of the Habeas Corpus Act 2001 provides:

An application to challenge the legality of a person’s detention may be made by an application for a writ of habeas corpus.

[9]        It is therefore a prerequisite to such a challenge that the applicant is indeed detained. The applicant has not, in her memorandum filed on 30 March 2021 referred to any current detention, and it is clear that although she had in the past been detained, that detention was at an end.

Outcome

[10]      Applications for writ of habeas corpus can only be considered where an applicant is in fact currently detained at the time the application was made. As there is no current detention, the Court is unable to consider the application.

[11]Accordingly, it is dismissed.

Churchman J

Solicitors:

Crown Law, Wellington for Respondent cc:     S M Grant