Siemer v Auckland High Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI

SC 136/2021
[2022] NZSC 8

BETWEEN	VINCENT ROSS SIEMER Applicant
AND	AUCKLAND HIGH COURT First Respondent MATTHEW SIMON RUSSELL PALMER Second Respondent

Court:	William Young, Glazebrook and O’Regan JJ
Counsel:	Applicant in person A M Powell and R M McMenamin for Respondents
Judgment:	17 February 2022

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 6 December 2021 (Siemer v Auckland High Court [2021] NZSC 173) is dismissed.

BThe applicant must pay the respondents costs of $1,868.90.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

The applicant has applied for the recall of our judgment of 6 December 2021 dismissing his application for leave to appeal.[1] Nothing advanced in support warrants recall of the judgment and the application for recall is accordingly dismissed.
[1]Siemer v Auckland High Court [2021] NZSC 173.
Costs were reserved in this Court’s leave judgment. Counsel for the respondents subsequently filed a memorandum seeking an order that the applicant pay the respondents actual costs of $1,868.90. We award costs in that sum.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondents

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Vincent Ross Siemer, an applicant, sought recall of a decision by the Supreme Court of New Zealand which dismissed his application for leave to appeal. The respondents to the recall application were the Auckland High Court and Matthew Simon Russell Palmer. The applicants sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Auckland High Court which had dismissed his appeal from the District Court. The Supreme Court had previously dismissed the application for leave to appeal and the applicant sought to have that decision recalled.

The legal issue before the court was whether the grounds provided by the applicant for recall of the Supreme Court's decision were sufficient to warrant recall. The applicant argued that there were errors in the Supreme Court's decision which warranted recall. The respondents argued that there were no such errors and that the application for recall should be dismissed.

The Supreme Court dismissed the application for recall and ordered that the applicant pay the respondents costs of $1,868.90. The court found that there were no grounds for recall of the previous decision and that the application should be dismissed. The court also found that the applicant should pay the respondents costs of the recall application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established