Poros v Bax

[2020] NZHC 3024

NOTE: PURSUANT TO S 35A OF THE PROPERTY (RELATIONSHIPS) ACT 1976, ANY REPORT OF THIS PROCEEDING MUST COMPLY WITH SS 11B,

11C AND 11D OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT 1980. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE SEE

https://www.justice.govt.nz/family/about/restriction-on-publishing-judgments/

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA KIRIKIRIROA ROHE

CIV-2019-419-0145

[2020] NZHC 3024

BETWEEN

SPYRIDON POROS

Appellant

AND

KYLIE BRIDGET BAX

First respondent

HELEN-GAY BAX and WILLIAM

GRAHAM BAX as trustees of the GOLDEYE TRUST

Second respondent

Hearing:

On the papers

Counsel:

J D Noble for the appellant

DAT Chambers QC for the respondents

Judgment:

16 November 2020

JUDGMENT OF JAGOSE J

[Application for recall of judgment declining leave to appeal

This judgment was delivered by me on 16 November 2020 at 3.30pm.

Pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

…………………………

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Counsel/Solicitors:

DAT Chambers QC, Auckland Boyle Mathieson, Auckland

POROS v BAX [2020] NZHC 3024 [16 November 2020]

[1]    Mr Poros seeks to recall my judgment of 22 October 2020,1 declining his application for leave to appeal my earlier judgment of 7 July 2020,2 on grounds the later judgment failed to address “potentially the strongest of Mr Poros’ grounds for leave to be granted” – argued to be on first appeal, as not addressed by the Family Court – being as to my earlier finding a disposition by the Trust to Ms Bax as a loan could not have been to defeat Mr Poros’ claim or right.3

[2]    The familiar grounds for recall are: where there is new relevant statutory or judicial authority; counsel have failed to direct the Court’s attention to a legislative provision or authoritative decision of plain relevance; or for some other very special reason justice requires that the judgment be recalled.4 Inferentially, Mr Poros relies on the last.

[3]    On my refusal of leave to appeal, Mr Poros may apply for leave to appeal against my earlier judgment directly to the Court of Appeal.5 If my later judgment does not serve justice’s requirements, Mr Poros’ recourse is by that direct route. Justice does not require recall of my judgment refusing leave to appeal. I therefore am unable to identify any qualifying reason for recall. Neither then do I address the ground claimed for recall. It is no part of the judicial role retrospectively to justify an earlier judgment.

[4]Recall is refused.

—Jagose J

1      Poros v Bax [2020] NZHC 2769.

2      Poros v Bax [2020] NZHC 1602.

3 At [50].

4      Williams v Auckland Council [2016] NZSC 130 at [4], citing Saxmere Company Ltd v Wool Board Disestablishment Company Ltd [2009] NZSC 122, [2010] 1 NZLR 76 at [2] (citing Horowhenua County v Nash (No 2) [1968] NZLR 632 (SC) at 633).

5      Property (Relationships) Act 1976, s 39B; Senior Courts Act 2016, s 60(2).