| IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND |
| CA38/2012 [2012] NZCA 432 |
| BETWEEN JOHN KENNETH SLAVICH |
| AND THE QUEEN |
| Court: O'Regan P, Harrison and White JJ |
| Counsel: Appellant in Person |
| Judgment: 21 September 2012 at 11 am On the papers |
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
The appeal is dismissed.
REASONS OF THE COURT
(Given by Harrison J)
John Slavich appeals against a decision of Heath J given in the High Court at Hamilton on 13 December 2011[1] dismissing an application to set aside or recall his decision delivered on 12 October 2006[2] convicting Mr Slavich of various dishonesty offences.
[1] Slavich v New Zealand Police HC Hamilton CIV-2006-419-89, 13 December 2011.
[2] R v Slavich (verdict) HC Hamilton CIV-2006-419-89, 12 October 2006.
Mr Slavich appealed against his 2006 conviction in the High Court. This Court dismissed his appeal on 15 May 2009.[3] Mr Slavich applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. On 10 August 2009 his application for leave was declined.[4] On 13 September 2011 the Supreme Court dismissed Mr Slavich’s application to recall its earlier decision.[5] On 22 November 2011 this Court dismissed Mr Slavich’s application for an order recalling its 2009 decision.[6] Mr Slavich has since applied again to this Court to recall its 2009 and 2011 decisions. In a decision delivered contemporaneously with this judgment we have dismissed that application.[7]
[3] R vSlavich [2009] NZCA 188.
We are satisfied that Heath J correctly dismissed Mr Slavich’s application to recall for want of jurisdiction on the ground that it was a collateral attack on the earlier judgments of this Court and the Supreme Court, which had fully considered and determined the same issues which Mr Slavich now seeks to raise and argue again.
We are satisfied also that Mr Slavich’s appeal is an abuse of this Court’s process.
The appeal is dismissed.
Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent
- AGLC
- Slavich v R [2012] NZCA 432
- Case
- [2012] NZCA 432
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court held that Heath J was correct in dismissing the application as it was a collateral attack on the earlier judgments of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, which had already fully considered and determined the same issues. The Court of Appeal was satisfied that the appellant's appeal was an abuse of its process. The appeal was dismissed, and the decision of Heath J was upheld.
No final orders were made in this particular judgment, as the appeal was dismissed. However, the dismissal of the appeal reinforces the earlier decisions of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, maintaining the conviction of the appellant for the various dishonesty offences.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.