IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY
CIV-2012-485-002525 [2013] NZHC 2748
UNDER Section 59 of the Legal Services Act 2011
IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from a decision of the Legal Aid
Tribunal
BETWEEN TODD AARON MARTELEY Appellant/Respondent
ANDTHE LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER Respondent/Applicant
CIV-2012-485-001314
BETWEEN TODD AARON MARTELEY Appellant/Respondent
ANDLEGAL AID TRIBUNAL Respondent/Applicant
Hearing: 21 October 2013
Counsel: G K Edgeler for Appellant/Respondent (Mr Marteley via AVL) F M R Cooke QC for Respondent/Applicant
Judgment: 21 October 2013
JUDGMENT OF COLLINS J [Application for Leave to Appeal]
[1] I heard this case on 28 May 2013 and gave judgment on 31 May 2013 in favour of Mr Marteley.
[2] On 21 June 2013 the Legal Services Commissioner (the Commissioner) filed an application for leave to appeal my judgment. That application is opposed.
MARTELEY v THE LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER [2013] NZHC 2748 [21 October 2013]
[3] Unfortunately, the Commissioner’s application has only recently been placed
before me.
[4] The question of law raised by my judgment concerns the threshold which an applicant for criminal legal aid must satisfy in order to receive a grant of legal aid. That issue is one which, by reason of its general and public importance ought to be submitted to the Court of Appeal for its decision.1
[5] The questions of law which I would certify for the Court of Appeal are:
1.Did I err when I decided that when considering the interests of justice under s 8(1)(c)(ii) of the Legal Services Act 2011, the requirements of s 8(2)(a)(viii) of the Act are satisfied if the grounds of appeal set out by an applicant for criminal legal aid disclose matters which, if established, would be capable of leading to the appeal being allowed?
2.Did I err when I decided that the Commissioner erred when failing to take into account factors set out in paragraphs [55]-[57] of my judgment?
D B Collins J
Solicitors:
Nat Dunning, Wellington for Appellant
Minter Ellison Rudd Watts, Wellington for Respondent
1 Legal Services Act 2011, s 60; Summary Proceedings Act 1957, s 144.
- AGLC
- Marteley v Legal Services Commissioner [2013] NZHC 2748
- Case
- [2013] NZHC 2748
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined two primary legal questions. Firstly, whether the High Court was correct in its interpretation that the grounds of appeal set out by an applicant for criminal legal aid need only disclose matters capable of leading to the appeal being allowed to satisfy the requirements of section 8(2)(a)(viii) of the Legal Services Act 2011. Secondly, the court considered if the High Court correctly identified that the Commissioner had failed to take into account specific factors outlined in paragraphs [55]-[57] of the earlier judgment.
In its reasoning, the court acknowledged the importance of the issues raised and their general and public significance. The court determined that these questions warranted the consideration of the Court of Appeal to ensure a consistent and correct interpretation of the legal aid provisions. Consequently, the court certified the questions for the Court of Appeal's decision.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.