Sutton v Wellington City Council HC Wellington CRI-2010-485-137

[2011] NZHC 1302

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CRI-2010-485-137

DAVID BRENT SUTTON

Appellant

v

WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL

Respondent

Hearing:         1 March 2011

(Heard at Wellington)

Counsel:         Appellant in Person

A White for Respondent

Judgment:      1 March 2011

JUDGMENT OF JOSEPH WILLIAMS J

In accordance with r 11.5, I direct the Registrar to endorse this judgment with the delivery time of 2.00pm on the 1st March 2011.

[1]      This is an appeal filed by Mr Sutton.  It is not defended by the Wellington

City Council (WCC).

[2]      I accept Mr Sutton’s argument supported by Kelly v Wellington City Council[1]

[1] [1995] 3 NZLR 750.

that the evidence before the Justices was not sufficient to support their conclusion that the relevant bylaw signage requirements were substantially complied with.  In

DAVID BRENT SUTTON V WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL HC WN CRI-2010-485-137 1 March 2011

particular, there was insufficient evidence of signage within the coupon zone for the purpose of cl 8.2(b). Accordingly, Mr Sutton could not be found guilty of allowing a vehicle to remain parked in a valid coupon parking area in contravention of the bylaw.

[3]      The appeal is allowed accordingly.

[4]      WCC asks that costs lie where they fall. That is appropriate.

Joseph Williams J

Solicitors:

DLA Phillips Fox, Wellington