Reid v Tararua District Council HC Wellington CIV 2007 485 333

[2007] NZHC 1773

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CIV 2007 485 333

UNDER  s 299 of the Resource Management Act

1991

IN THE MATTER OF     of an application for orders pursuant to s

303 of the Resource Management Act 1991 and Part VII of the High Court Rules

BETWEEN  JAMES ROBERT REID Appellant

ANDTARARUA DISTRICT COUNCIL First Respondent

ANDTHE MINISTER FOR LAND INFORMATION

Second Respondent

Hearing:         31 May 2007

Counsel:         Appellant in person

J A L Oliver for Second Respondent
A Cameron for First Respondent
R Chan for Environment Court in support of the application

Judgment:      31 May 200731 May 2007

ORAL RULING OF RONALD YOUNG J

[1]      Two applications were before the Court this morning.

[2]      Firstly, the application by the Tararua District Council to strike out the appeal which in turn was an appeal against a strike out.

[3]      In my view it is not appropriate for such appeals to dealt with in this way. The issue is a very narrow jurisdictional point raised by Mr Reid.  The proper course

JAMES ROBERT REID V TARARUA DISTRICT COUNCIL HC WN CIV 2007 485 333  31 May 2007

is to hear full argument on the substantive question as to the grounds of his appeal and rule on that rather than have intermediate interlocutory issues intervene.

[4]      The application therefore for strike out in my view is without jurisdiction.

[5]      The second series of applications are from Mr Reid.   He notified three applications although the third is essentially his defence to the application for strike out that I have just dealt with.

[6]      The other two applications were firstly, an application that the Environment Court lodge with the Registrar of the High Court all documents it its possession.  Mr Reid agrees they’ve done that.

[7]      Secondly, that the Environment Court lodge with the Registrar of the High Court in Wellington a report setting out the reasons and considerations to which the Court had regard in its decision the subject of which Mr Reid wishes to appeal.

[8]      Essentially what Mr Reid is trying to get the Judge in the Environment Court to do is to provide another set of reasons for his decision to strike out Mr Reid’s claim.  That is not a permissible use of the statutory provision.  The Judge has given his reasons and it’s on those reasons Mr Reid must base his appeal.  That application is therefore refused.

[9]      This matter should have an urgent hearing date.  It’s set down for hearing on

Friday the 8th of June at 10 am.

[10]     Mr Reid is to file and serve his points on appeal by 5 pm 6 June.

[11]     I anticipate the hearing would be unlikely to need more than two hours.

“Ronald Young J”

Solicitors:           2 Vogel Street, Woodville for Appellant

Crown Law Office, Wellington for Second Respondent and R Chan

Cameron Ross, Wanganui for First Respondent