CREQUER v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2015] NZCA 623

CREQUER v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2015] NZCA 623 [18 December 2015]IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALANDCA414/2015[2015] NZCA 623BETWEEN DAVID OWEN CREQUERApplicantAND THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THEMINISTRY OF SOCIALDEVELOPMENTRespondentCourt: Randerson, French and Kós JJJudgment: 1 December 2015 at 10.00 am(On the papers)Reissued: 18 December 2015 at 2.15 pmJUDGMENT OF THE COURTA The judgment of the Court dated 1 December 2015 ([2015] NZCA 582) is recalled.B The application for review of the Deputy Registrar's decision notaccepting the application for an extension of time for filing is declined.C The application for extension of time is not to be accepted for filing.____________________________________________________________________REASONS OF THE COURT(Given by Kós J)[1] Our judgment of 1 December 2015 granted Mr Crequer's application forreview of a Deputy Registrar's decision to refuse permission for a r 43(2) applicationfor extension of time to be filed electronically.1[2] We are advised by the Registry that Mr Crequer has not paid the filing fee on the original notice of appeal ($1,100). A fee waiver application was dismissed, and a review application was also dismissed by Wild J on 11 August 2015.2[3] In considering Mr Crequer's later review application our attention was notdrawn to reg 7(3) of the Court of Appeal Fees Regulations 2001:(3) Following a determination that has the effect referred to in subclause (2), the person responsible for paying the fee may not take a step in the proceeding to which the fee relates unless the fee is paid.[4] The effect of reg 7(3) was that Mr Crequer was not entitled to take any further step in the proceeding after 11 August 2015 without having paid the originalfiling fee for the appeal. Mr Crequer's application for extension of time was filed on5 October 2015.[5] We sought further submissions from parties on this point. The respondent opted not to file. Having considered the submissions offered by Mr Crequer, we consider the effect of reg 7(3) is clear, is as stated at [4] and that no basis exists upon which an exception can or should be made for Mr Crequer.[6] It follows that we uphold the Deputy Registrar's decision not to receiveMr Crequer's application for extension of time, but for different reasons.[7] Accordingly:(a) we recall our judgment of 1 December 2015;1 Crequer v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development [2015] NZCA 582.2 Crequer v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development [2015] NZCA 365.(b) the application for review of the Deputy Registrar's decision notaccepting the application for an extension of time for filing is declined; and(c) the application for extension of time is not to be accepted for filing.[8] For the avoidance of doubt, recall does not alter the efficacy of conclusions reached at [8] to [13] of our earlier judgment concerning the right to file applications (other than for leave to appeal) electronically.Solicitors:Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent