PARLANE V WAIPA DISTRICT COUNCIL CA CA319/05
Special leave to appeal was granted because the matter raised a question of law—whether the High Court correctly exercised s 7 severance powers in deleting clause 2(a)—which was of general and public importance and therefore suitable for determination by the Court of Appeal.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- openlaw-5d525c43_dec1_4368_b975_362337ee4db8.pdf
- Parties
- Applicant: James Charles Morris Parlane; Respondent: Waipa District Council
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 7 December 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Special Leave to Appeal / Leave Granted
- Outcome
- Special leave to appeal granted
- Legal Topics
- Special Leave to Appeal, Severance of Bylaw Clause, Bylaws Act 1910 S7, Judicial Review of Bylaws
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
James Charles Morris Parlane
Applicant
Waipa District Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Special Leave to Appeal / Leave Granted
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court Judge was correct to sever clause 2 of the bylaw by deleting clause 2(a) under s 7 of the Bylaws Act 1910
Ratio Decidendi
Special leave to appeal was granted because the matter raised a question of law—whether the High Court correctly exercised s 7 severance powers in deleting clause 2(a)—which was of general and public importance and therefore suitable for determination by the Court of Appeal.
Court Disposition
Special leave to appeal granted
Orders
- Applicant to have $1,500 costs and usual disbursements on this application
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
PARLANE V WAIPA DISTRICT COUNCIL CA CA319/05 7 December 2005IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA319/05BETWEEN JAMES CHARLES MORRIS PARLANE Applicant AND WAIPA DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Hearing: 5 December 2005 Court: Anderson P, Glazebrook and Hammond JJ Counsel: P F Gorringe for Applicant C T Gudsell for Respondent Judgment: 7 December 2005JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 1 The application for special leave to appeal is granted, on this question: Whether the High Court Judge was correct in proceeding, under s 7 of the Bylaws Act 1910, to sever cl 2 of the relevant bylaw, as to lighting of fires, by deleting cl 2(a) in its entirety. 2 Applicant to have $1,500 costs and usual disbursements on this application. REASONS(Given by Hammond J)Introduction[1] This is an application for special leave to appeal under s 144 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957. [2] We are satisfied that the proposed appeal raises a question of law, which we formulate in these terms: Whether the High Court Judge was correct in proceeding, under s 7 of the Bylaws Act 1910, to sever cl 2 of the relevant bylaw as to lighting of fires, by deleting cl 2(a) in its entirety. [3] We are satisfied that this question is one which, by reason of its general and public importance, is one which ought to be submitted for the determination of this Court. [4] The applicant will have costs of $1,500 and usual disbursements, on this application.Solicitors: J C M Parlane, Te Awamutu for Applicant Gallie Miles, Te Awamutu for Respondent