John McVeagh v The Attorney-General

[2000] NZCA 292

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA90/00

BETWEEN	JOHN MCVEAGH
Appellant

AND	THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Respondent

Coram:	Gault J Thomas J Keith J
Judgment (on the papers):	17 October 2000

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT DELIVERED BY KEITH J

1. Mr McVeagh has applied for conditional leave to appeal to the Privy Council against a decision of this Court given on 24 August 2000 dismissing his appeal against a High Court order.  That Court struck out his application for leave to bring proceedings under s124 of the Mental Health Act 1969 and his statement of claim.  This Court had two reasons for agreeing with the High Court that the proceedings should be struck out.  The first was that they had been commenced in 1999 and were time barred under s124 of the 1969 Act which required the application to be made within six months of Mr McVeagh’s release in 1993.  The second reason was that the matters raised in this statement of claim are res judicata. 

2. Under the New Zealand (Appeals to the Privy Council) Order 1910, leave to appeal to the Privy Council can be sought, as of right, in respect of a final judgment where the amount in dispute is of the value of $5,000 or more and, at the discretion of this Court, from any other judgment of this Court whether final or interlocutory if, in the opinion of this Court, the question involved in the appeal is one which by reason its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the Privy Council for decision.  It is the second head of jurisdiction which is relevant in this case.  There is nothing in the judgment which begins to suggest that the question is of great general or public importance.  As well, there is no demonstrated reason justifying the invoking of the ground for granting leave indicated by the words “or otherwise”.

3. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.