Newlands v Nelson City Council - [2020] NZSC 108

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI

SC 53/2020
[2020] NZSC 108

BETWEEN	DONNA MARY NEWLANDS Applicant
AND	NELSON CITY COUNCIL Respondent

Court:	Glazebrook, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Counsel:	Applicant in person K E Mitchell for Respondent
Judgment:	8 October 2020

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

Ms Newlands has filed an application for leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal.[1] In that decision, Collins J declined Ms Newlands’ application to review a decision of the Deputy Registrar not to dispense with security for costs on Ms Newlands’s appeal to the Court of Appeal against a strike-out decision by the High Court.[2] The High Court had earlier held it had no jurisdiction to hear an appeal against the District Court’s decision declining to make a pre-trial ruling under the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908 on whether strict liability is imposed by s 57(2) of the Dog Control Act 1996.[3]

Background

[1]Newlands v Nelson City Council [2020] NZCA 262 (Collins J).

[2]Newlands v Nelson City Council [2020] NZHC 447 (Associate Judge Lester).

[3]Newlands v Nelson City Council [2019] NZHC 1692 (Cull J) [HC leave judgment].

The application for leave has its origins in two charges brought by the respondent, the Nelson City Council (the Council), against Ms Newlands under ss 57(2) and 33EC of the Dog Control Act. The charges were laid on 31 January 2019. The defended District Court hearing has been delayed due to intervening proceedings and successful applications for a series of adjournments by Ms Newlands.
Ms Newlands unsuccessfully applied in this Court for a stay of the District Court’s decision.[4] At the time of this Court’s stay decision, the defended District Court hearing was to be held on 19 August 2020. It is now to be held on 2 December 2020.

Submissions

[4]Newlands v Nelson City Council [2020] NZSC 80 (Glazebrook, Ellen France and Williams JJ).

Ms Newlands submits that Collins J did not address the merits of her appeal, including the purpose of the Declaratory Judgments Act, and that Collins J erred in refusing the review of the security for costs decision on a premise that the offence Ms Newlands is charged with is one of strict liability. Ms Newlands says the issue of whether the offence is strict liability engages the right to be presumed innocent under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.[5] Ms Newlands relies on Reekie v Attorney‑General, which recognised that vindication of rights under the Bill of Rights Act may have personal and public non-financial benefits.[6]
[5]New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 25(c).
[6]Reekie v Attorney-General [2014] NZSC 63, [2014] 1 NZLR 737 at [41].
The Council submits that there can be no genuine public interest in the appeal because the issues for which declarations were originally sought have already been conclusively determined…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Newlands v Nelson City Council and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2020] NZSC 108
Decision Date: 8 October 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Newlands v Nelson City Council, the applicant, Donna Mary Newlands, sought leave to appeal a decision of the Court of Appeal which had declined her application to review a decision of the Deputy Registrar not to dispense with security for costs on her appeal to the Court of Appeal against a strike-out decision by the High Court. The High Court had previously ruled that it had no jurisdiction to hear an appeal against the District Court’s decision declining to make a pre-trial ruling under the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908 on whether strict liability is imposed by s 57(2) of the Dog Control Act 1996. The central legal issue in this case was whether the Court of Appeal's refusal to review the security for costs decision constituted an error that warranted an appeal. Ms Newlands argued that the Court of Appeal did not address the merits of her appeal and erred by refusing the review based on the premise that the offence she was charged with is one of strict liability. She contended that this issue engaged the right to be presumed innocent under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The Nelson City Council, on the other hand, maintained that there was no genuine public interest in the appeal as the issues for which declarations were originally sought had already been conclusively determined by the courts. The Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal, holding that the principles applicable to security for costs had been correctly applied and that no question of general or public importance arose from the approach to security for costs. Consequently, the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of $2,500.

Orders