Sisson v Canterbury District Law Society HC Christchurch CIV-2011-409-915

[2011] NZHC 695

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CIV-2011-409-915

IN THE MATTER OF     the Insolvency Act 2006

AND IN THE MATTER OF the bankruptcy of THERESE ANNE SISSON

BETWEEN  THERESE ANNE SISSON Judgment Debtor

ANDTHE CANTERBURY DISTRICT LAW SOCIETY AND THE CANTERBURY LAW PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL

Judgment Creditors

Hearing:         12 July 2011

Appearances: Mr P James for creditors

Ms T Sisson in person

Judgment:      12 July 2011

(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF LANG J

[on application for order that bankruptcy notice be set aside]

SISSON V THE CANTERBURY DISTRICT LAW SOCIETY AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV-2011-409-915 12

July 2011

[1]      Ms Sisson has been engaged in a long-running encounter with the Canterbury District Law Society.   It originally took the form of disciplinary proceedings.  Ms Sisson then instituted judicial review proceedings in this Court relating to the disciplinary proceedings.  Those were unsuccessful in both this Court and the Court of Appeal.  The hearings in the High Court and the Court of Appeal led to orders for costs being made against Ms Sisson.  The Canterbury District Law Society has now issued two bankruptcy notices based on those awards of costs.

[2]      Ms Sisson has filed an application to set aside the bankruptcy notice relating to the costs awarded to the Society in the Court of Appeal.   She has not taken a similar step in relation to the other bankruptcy notice, and that may have been as a result of oversight.

[3]      Ms Sisson argues that the Court should set aside the bankruptcy notice on the grounds that the interests of justice require that to be done.   She submits that the disciplinary proceedings were misguided, and that her stance in relation to that issue will be borne out when the New Zealand Law Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal determines her appeal against the District Society’s decision. That may ultimately be the case and, if so, it may affect any orders made by the Canterbury District Law Society.   So far as I can see, however, it is unlikely to affect the orders for costs made  by this  Court  and  the  Court  of Appeal  in  relation  to  the  judicial  review proceedings.  Those proceedings are entirely separate to the disciplinary proceedings taken by the Canterbury District Law Society.

[4]      This Court may have a limited discretion to set aside a bankruptcy notice when it is apparent that the judgment creditor is acting in a manner that constitutes an abuse of process.  The judgment creditor in this case, however, is endeavouring to enforce the payment of awards of cost made by this Court and the Court of Appeal. It must be entitled to take that step.  It cannot be said that the Society is acting in a manner that constitutes an abuse of process.

[5]      It will, of course, be open to Ms Sisson to argue that this Court should exercise its discretion not to make an order of adjudication in the event that the Canterbury District Law Society files proceedings seeking to have her adjudicated

bankrupt.  Alternatively, she may seek an order staying the substantive bankruptcy proceedings to enable her appeal before the New Zealand Law Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal to be heard and determined.

[6]      For these reasons I am satisfied that the application cannot succeed, and it is dismissed.

Costs

[7]      Costs must follow the event.  The Society is awarded costs on a Category 2B

basis together with disbursements as fixed by the Registrar.

Lang J

Solicitors:

Saunders & Co, Christchurch
Edgeware Law Centre, Christchurch