Stuart v Stoneham

[2021] NZHC 231

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2020-404-1946

[2021] NZHC 231

BETWEEN

NEIL GORDON STUART

Appellant

AND

ANNETTE LISA STONEHAM

Respondent

On the papers:	At Auckland
Date of Judgment:	22 February 2021

JUDGMENT OF POWELL J

[Application for leave to appeal interlocutory decisions]

This judgment was delivered by me on 22 February 2021 at 12 noon pursuant to R 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

STUART v STONEHAM [2021] NZHC 231 [22 February 2021]

[1]    On 19 November 2020 I issued a Minute confirming timetable directions issued by Moore J the previous week in relation to this appeal, after the appellant  Mr Stuart, sought to vary those directions.

[2]    By application dated 1 December 2020 Mr Stuart sought leave to appeal both Moore J’s original directions and my decision declining to vary. The application for leave  to  appeal  the  interlocutory  decisions   is   opposed   by   the   respondent, Ms Stoneham.

[3]    Although Mr Stuart’s application for leave to appeal was filed on 1 December 2020 it was not referred to me until 19 February 2021 and I was unaware it had been filed. It is not clear the reason for the delay, but I apologise to Mr Stuart for any inconvenience.

[4]    Although Mr Stuart’s application for leave seeks to challenge both the initial directions and my decision declining to vary those directions, it is clear that the directions at issue are in fact encapsulated in my Minute as that is the decision confirming the current timetable for the substantive appeal.

[5]    There is no basis for granting leave to appeal my decision. At the time it was made there was more than ample time for Mr Stuart to take appropriate steps to release funding, obtain legal representation and prepare for the appeal and as a result there is no issue that could possibly justify the intervention of the Court of Appeal.

[6]The application for leave to appeal is accordingly dismissed.

[7]    Having dismissed the application for leave I do however note that the hearing of the substantive appeal is set down for a one-day hearing on 9 March 2021. In the circumstances, and in particular the late referral of the application for leave to appeal to me for determination, I consider it appropriate to convene an urgent telephone conference as soon as possible to confirm arrangements for 9 March 2021 hearing.

Powell J