Rennie v Police

[2014] NZHC 1122

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

CRI-2014-470-8 [2014] NZHC 1122

BETWEEN

STEVEN LINDSAY RENNIE

Appellant

AND

POLICE Respondent

Hearing:	26 May 2014
Appearances:	Appellant in Person H J Sheridan for Respondent
Judgment:	26 May 2014

JUDGMENT OF COOPER J

Solicitors:

Ronayne Hollister-Jones Lellman, Crown Solicitors, Tauranga

RENNIE v POLICE [2014] NZHC 1122 [26 May 2014]

[1]      Mr Rennie has appeared this morning in support of his appeal against orders made by Judge Rollo on 29 April 2013.   Mr Rennie has explained his purpose in bringing the appeal as being that he was concerned about whether an indefinite disqualification still applied at the time he was responsible for the offending dealt with by Judge Rollo.

[2]      It is clear that he remained subject to a disqualification at the time of the offence date, namely 27 November 2011, at Paeroa.

[3]      It appears that Mr Rennie was confused by the fact that on 25 February 2011 a letter was sent from the New Zealand Transport Agency removing an indefinite disqualification  that  previously applied.    However,  the letter noted that  if  other “existing disqualifications or suspensions” applied then he could not re-qualify for a driver licence until those had ended.

[4]      When he received that letter he was still going through Court processes for the offence that he committed on 6 January 2011, of driving while disqualified.  That offence plainly occurred, as Ms Sheridan submits, prior to the indefinite disqualification being removed.  As a result of that offending he was disqualified again from driving on 14 March 2011 and that disqualification was confirmed by the High Court on 10 October 2011 as stated in the judgment of Woolford J.1

[5]      The 9 July 2009 indefinite disqualification had been removed by the time the appellant was caught driving on 27 November 2011.   However, there was a new disqualification in place which was effective for a minimum period of one year and one day from 28 April 2011.  Consequently, he was properly charged with driving whilst disqualified in the present case.

[6]      This appeal was lodged well out of time and no significant reason has been advanced why there should be any extension of time for appealing.   Following a discussion in Court this morning, Mr Rennie effectively indicated that he did not

wish to continue with the appeal.   He is, apparently, going through the processes

1      Rennie v New Zealand Police HC Auckland CRI-2011-404-000174, 10 October 2011.

again  to  get  the  existing  indefinite  disqualification  (imposed  by  Judge  Rollo) removed and in the circumstances the most appropriate course to follow is to refuse the application which he implicitly makes to extend the time for appealing.

[7]      That means that the appeal is dismissed.