Legal Research
Cases
Ronald van Wakeren v The Queen

Ronald van Wakeren v The Queen

Case [2012] NZSC 23 5 April 2012

Type to search within this case.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

SC 113/2011
[2012] NZSC 23

RONALD VAN WAKEREN

THE QUEEN

Court: Blanchard, McGrath and William Young JJ

Counsel: Applicant in person
A Markham for Crown

Judgment: 5 April 2012

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for recall is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

The applicant’s grounds for seeking the recall of this Court’s judgment of 5 December 2011[1] dismissing an application for leave to appeal against sentence is, in essence, a repetition of arguments advanced in support of his original application for leave to appeal. We have nonetheless reviewed his submissions as to those arguments and see no merit in them, essentially for the reasons given in the Crown submissions.
[1] Van Wakeren v R [2011] NZSC 147.
Accordingly the application for recall should be dismissed.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington

Details

AGLC: Ronald van Wakeren v The Queen [2012] NZSC 23
Case: [2012] NZSC 23
Decision Date: 5 April 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Ronald van Wakeren, the appellant, sought recall of the Supreme Court's judgment dismissing his application for leave to appeal against the sentence imposed on him. The Court, consisting of Justices Blanchard, McGrath, and William Young, dismissed the application for recall. The applicant, appearing in person, was represented by A Markham for the Crown. The case was decided on 5 April 2012.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant's application for recall should be granted, considering that it essentially repeated the arguments made in his original application for leave to appeal, which had already been dismissed. The Court reviewed the applicant's submissions but found no merit in them, aligning with the Crown's submissions. The Court found that the arguments presented by the applicant were essentially a repetition of those previously rejected, and thus, did not warrant a recall of the earlier judgment.

The Court concluded that the applicant's application for recall should be dismissed, as it did not present any new or compelling arguments that would justify revisiting the earlier decision. The reasoning was based on the repetitive nature of the arguments and the absence of any grounds for reconsideration.

The final order of the Court was the dismissal of the application for recall, with no further appeal available to the applicant on the matter of sentence.

Orders