Naresh v McCluskie

[2009] NZCA 386

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA766/2008
[2009] NZCA 386

BETWEENTULSI RAM NARESH

Appellant

ANDGORDON EDWARD MCCLUSKIE

Respondent

Court:William Young  P, Hammond and O'Regan JJ

Counsel:Appellant in Person

A R Gilchrist for Respondent

Judgment:3 September 2009 at 11 am

(On the papers)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

THE APPLICATION FOR A STAY AND/OR RECALL IS DISMISSED.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by William Young P)

[1]       Mr Naresh filed on 24 August 2009 a document styled:

APPLICATION FOR A LEAVE TO STAY AND APPLICATION TO STAY THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HIGH COURT CIV 2007-404 6152 HEARD AT AUCKLAND IN A RUSHEE/WISHEE FASHION

AND

DISMISSAL OF APPELLANT’S APPEAL AT APPEAL COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CIV 766/2008 WHERE APPELLANT WAS NOT REPRESENTED HEARD AT AUCKLAND OF TUESDAY, 21 JULY, 2009.

[2]       The appeal by Mr Naresh has been heard, determined and dismissed.  As far as we are aware, there has been no application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.  There is no basis upon which we could stay the judgment of the High Court (which this Court upheld) or stay the dismissal of the appellant’s appeal.  Looking at the document more carefully, however, it appears that in substance what the appellant seeks is in the nature of a recall of our judgment so that, in the appellant’s own words, “the matter could go back to drawing board for further discussion and resolutions”.

[3]       On either basis, the application must be dismissed.  There is no jurisdiction to grant a stay as requested.  And no basis for recalling the judgment has been demonstrated in the material filed.

Solicitors:
Vlatkovich & McGowan, Auckland for Respondent