SAX v CAMPBELL & ANOR [2021] NZHC 357

SAX v CAMPBELL & ANOR [2021] NZHC 357

The Court dismissed the recall application and both leave to appeal applications because the statutory and jurisprudential thresholds for recall and interlocutory leave were not met: no very special reason or arguable error of law or fact justified recall or leave; suppression was not justified given prior publication and the presumption of open justice; and costs were awarded to the successful respondent because the applicant unnecessarily increased time and expense by filing voluminous and partly irrelevant material.

Citation
[2021] NZHC 357
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Janine Davina Sax; First Respondent/applicant: Melody Anne Campbell; Second Respondent: District Court at Tauranga
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
5 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Interlocutory Applications (recall, Leave to Appeal, Suppression, Costs)
Outcome
All outstanding applications dismissed; costs awarded to respondent
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Joinder, Recall of Judgment, Leave to Appeal, Suppression Orders, Increased Costs
Civil Procedure Judicial Review Harassment Media/suppression Costs Security for Costs Joinder Recall of Judgment +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janine Davina Sax

Appellant/respondent

Melody Anne Campbell

First Respondent/applicant

District Court at Tauranga

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Interlocutory Applications (recall, Leave to Appeal, Suppression, Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court should recall its interlocutory Security and Joinder judgment
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal interlocutory Security and Joinder decision should be granted under s56(3) Senior Courts Act 2016
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal refusal to grant interim suppression should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the recall application and both leave to appeal applications because the statutory and jurisprudential thresholds for recall and interlocutory leave were not met: no very special reason or arguable error of law or fact justified recall or leave; suppression was not justified given prior publication and the presumption of open justice; and costs were awarded to the successful respondent because the applicant unnecessarily increased time and expense by filing voluminous and partly irrelevant material.

Court Disposition

All outstanding applications dismissed; costs awarded to respondent

Orders

  • Recall application dismissed
  • Leave to appeal Security and Joinder decision dismissed (time for filing extended but leave refused)