Slavich v Wellington District Court

[2024] NZSC 30

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI O AOTEAROA

 SC 15/2024
 [2024] NZSC 30

BETWEEN	JOHN KENNETH SLAVICH Applicant
AND	WELLINGTON DISTRICT COURT First Respondent ATTORNEY-GENERAL Second Respondent

Court:	Glazebrook, Kós and Miller JJ
Counsel:	Applicant in person
Judgment:	16 April 2024

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for review is declined.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

1. The applicant’s appeal was struck out in the Court of Appeal on 14 February 2024.  First, under r 37(1) of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 for non-payment of security for costs and, secondly, under r 44A for failure to prosecute the appeal with due diligence, by failing to pay the filing fee for the appeal.[1]  The background circumstances are set out in full in the decision of the Court of Appeal and need not be traversed again here.

   [1]Slavich v Wellington District Court [2024] NZCA 12 (Goddard and Mallon JJ) at [17].

2. The applicant does not seek leave to appeal against that decision.[2]  Instead he seeks leave to appeal a direction by Mallon J, made after the appeal had been struck out, to take no action on a collateral complaint of contempt made against Crown counsel in the appeal.  That direction, given on 15 February 2024, stated that as the appeal had been struck out, no live matter remained before that Court for decision. 

   [2]Mr Slavich confirmed that fact in correspondence with a Deputy Registrar of this Court.

3. A Deputy Registrar of this Court rejected the present application for leave to appeal on the basis that there was no application for leave to appeal against the judgment below striking out the applicant’s appeal.  The applicant seeks review of this filing decision.

4. The position here is not dissimilar to that in Fehling v West Coast District Health Board.[3]  The circumstances of the present application are that there is no longer a live proceeding below, and nor is there an application for leave to appeal calculated to reinstate that former proceeding.  That combination of events effectively leaves this Court without jurisdiction to act in terms of s 68 of the Senior Courts Act 2016.[4] 

   [3]Fehling v West Coast District Health Board [2016] NZSC 155.

   [4]None of this, of course, precludes resort by the applicant to the complaint procedures under Part 7 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006.

5. The application for review is declined.