Wilson v Parole Board HC Christchurch CRI 2009-409-47

[2010] NZHC 1494

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CRI-2009-409-000047

STUART MURRAY WILSON

v

PAROLE BOARD

Appearances: A McKenzie

Judgment:      19 August 2010

JUDGMENT OF HON. JUSTICE FRENCH

[1]      On 21 May 2009 I delivered a judgment rejecting Mr Wilson’s appeal against an order of the parole board that he not be released after serving two-thirds of his sentence.  He was dissatisfied with that outcome and sought to appeal my decision. To that end, he filed an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

[2]      There was some uncertainty as to the correct procedure to be followed.  In order to preserve his position on all fronts, counsel for Mr Wilson filed an appeal with the Court of Appeal pursuant to s 66 of the Judicature Act 1908, as well as filing an application for leave in this Court under s 144 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1980.

[3]      When  I  came  to  consider  the  application  for  leave,  I  acceded  to  Mr

McKenzie’s request that the application filed in this Court should lie in this Court

WILSON V PAROLE BOARD HC CHCH CRI-2009-409-000047  19 August 2010

with no further action taken until such time as the Court of Appeal determined the issue.

[4]      That was on 23 July 2009.  Since then, the Court of Appeal has delivered its decision, both as to process and substantive merits.  In the course of its decision the Court of Appeal addressed the procedural issue and held at [52] and [53] of their decision that s 144 of the Summary Proceedings Act did not apply.

[5]      It follows that the application for leave should be dismissed, and I so hold.

Solicitors:

S B Law, Christchurch

(Counsel: A McKenzie, Christchurch) Crown Law, Wellington