Siemer v Ministry of Justice

In Siemer v Ministry of Justice, Vincent Ross Siemer sought leave to commence an application for judicial review against the Ministry of Justice and Clayton Luke, a Disputes Tribunal Referee. The case was heard by Justice Peters in the High Court of New Zealand. Mr Siemer had previously been subject to an order from the Court of Appeal that he must obtain leave from the High Court before commencing any proceeding in the High Court or any inferior court. The primary legal issue before the court was whether Mr Siemer should be granted leave to proceed with his judicial review application, given the restrictions placed upon him by the previous Court of Appeal order. The court needed to determine if there were prima facie grounds for the proceeding and whether it would not be an abuse of the court’s process.

Justice Peters dismissed Mr Siemer's application for leave. The court held that the criteria for granting leave under the Senior Courts Act 2016, which replaced the repealed Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016, required evidence that the allegations in the proposed statement of claim were accurate. Mr Siemer had not provided an affidavit or any evidence to support his claims, such as relevant documents and communications. Without such evidence, the court could not determine whether the application should proceed or be served on any specified person. The court concluded that the application for leave did not meet the necessary threshold for further consideration.

In conclusion, Justice Peters dismissed Mr Siemer’s application for leave to commence his judicial review against the Ministry of Justice and Clayton Luke, due to the lack of evidence to support his claims. The court emphasized the importance of providing full and frank disclosure of all relevant documents and communications when applying for leave under the Senior Courts Act 2016.