MUSSON V MINISTRY OF FISHERIES HC INV CIV-2011-425-000043
The appellant's filings failed to identify any relevant grounds challenging the District Court judgment for levies; therefore the appeal was dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- openlaw-9bd8ca58_5ff1_4039_82e3_b5b8087d45ec.pdf
- Parties
- Appellant: ANTHONY PHILLIP MUSSON; Respondent: MINISTRY OF FISHERIES
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 6 April 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal From District Court / Dismissal at Preliminary Stage for Failure to Identify Grounds of Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Levies, Appeal Grounds, Procedural Compliance, Jurisdiction
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
ANTHONY PHILLIP MUSSON
Appellant
MINISTRY OF FISHERIES
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal From District Court / Dismissal at Preliminary Stage for Failure to Identify Grounds of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 whether the notices of appeal identified relevant grounds
- 2 whether the appeal against levies under fisheries legislation was arguable
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant's filings failed to identify any relevant grounds challenging the District Court judgment for levies; therefore the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- District Court judgment for $4,502.18 stands
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
MUSSON V MINISTRY OF FISHERIES HC INV CIV-2011-425-000043 6 April 2011IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDINVERCARGILL REGISTRYCIV-2011-425-000043BETWEEN ANTHONY PHILLIP MUSSONAppellantAND MINISTRY OF FISHERIESRespondentHearing: 5 April 2011Counsel: Appellant in personMs Berryman and Mr Eng for RespondentJudgment: 6 April 2011JUDGMENT OF LANG JThis judgment was delivered by me on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 at 4pmpursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.Registrar/Deputy RegistrarSolicitors/Counsel:Luke Cunningham & Clere, DX SP23529, Wellington 6143. Email: mgb@lcc.co.nzCopy to:A P Musson, 8 Thule Road, Stewart Island.[1] The Ministry of Fisheries obtained judgment in the District Court againstMr Musson in the sum of $4,502.18. That sum related to levies that Mr Musson wasobliged to pay the Ministry in terms of the fisheries legislation.[2] On 12 November 2010 Mr Musson filed a document purporting to be a noticeof appeal against that decision. He filed similar documents on 30 November 2010and 26 January 2011.[3] The respondent took the point that the notices did not appear to containrelevant grounds of appeal. On 18 October 2010 and 7 February 2011 Fogarty Jrequired Mr Musson to identify relevant grounds of appeal.[4] Mr Musson purported to comply with this direction by filing a document on5 April 2011. That document reads as follows:Judge MacCaskill in combination with the Council for the Court haveenforced the Mental Health Act in support of consulting engineersChristchurch. As a result of Judge MacCaskill decision, the continuedpractice of the consulting engineers, has result in 300 fatalities Christchurch.Pacific Canneries Ltd, are part of the Treaty of Waitangi agreement. Mr RTanui Manning, who receives direct instruction from Chief ExecutiveMinistry of Fisheries, Seafood Industry Council, Crown Solicitor.R Manning is also a member of the local body group quote owners Paumac Incorporated. There directives are from the Chief Executive Ministry of Fisheries, Crown Solicitor.Judge MacCaskill is again enforcing the Mental Health Act where it is not appropriate.N.B. Ministry of Fisheries staff are in support having identified criminalactivities.[5] These documents do not provide any relevant grounds for appealing againstthe judgment in respect of the levies. On that basis I conclude that Mr Musson hasno relevant grounds of appeal in respect of that judgment.[6] The appeal is accordingly dismissed...Lang J