Vincent Ross Siemer v Clare O�Brien and Attorney-General

[2015] NZSC 63

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

SC 24/2015
[2015] NZSC 63

BETWEEN

VINCENT ROSS SIEMER
Applicant

AND

CLARE O'BRIEN
First Respondent

ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Second Respondent

Court:	Elias CJ, William Young and O'Regan JJ
Counsel:	V R Siemer in person D L Harris for First and Second Respondents
Judgment:	15 May 2015

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A        The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

BThe applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the second respondent.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

1. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against a decision of White J dismissing his application for review of a decision of the Deputy Registrar of the Court of Appeal refusing to dispense with security for costs.[1]  The applicant has challenged the participation of the second respondent in the appeal (CA 693/2014) and says security for costs should not have been ordered in favour of the second respondent.

   [1]Siemer v O’Brien [2015] NZCA 86 (White J).

2. This Court has already dismissed the applicant’s objection to the participation of the second respondent in the appeal (CA 693/2014).[2]  In dismissing the application for review, White J applied the principles set out in Reekie v Attorney‑General.[3]  Those principles are settled and no point of public importance arises.  There is no appearance of a miscarriage of justice.

   [2]Siemer v O’Brien [2015] NZSC 13 at [5].

   [3]Reekie v Attorney-General [2014] NZSC 63, [2014] 1 NZLR 737.

3. The application is therefore dismissed.

4. The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the second respondent.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for the Respondents