MCGUIRE V SHERIDAN SC 23/2011
Leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant attempted to raise new grounds that were not advanced in the Court of Appeal; the Supreme Court refused to permit those new grounds and dismissed the application.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- SC 23/2011
- Parties
- Applicant: Jeremy James McGuire; Respondent: Lee Grace Sheridan
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 13 April 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal in the Supreme Court
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Raising New Grounds on Appeal, Dismissal, Costs
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jeremy James McGuire
Applicant
Lee Grace Sheridan
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal in the Supreme Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted
- 2 Whether the applicant may raise new grounds not advanced in the Court of Appeal
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the respondent
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant attempted to raise new grounds that were not advanced in the Court of Appeal; the Supreme Court refused to permit those new grounds and dismissed the application.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Orders
- Leave to appeal dismissed
- Respondent awarded costs of $2,000
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
MCGUIRE V SHERIDAN SC 23/2011 13 April 2011IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDSC 23/2011[2011] NZSC 40BETWEEN JEREMY JAMES MCGUIREApplicantAND LEE GRACE SHERIDANRespondentCourt: Blanchard, Tipping and McGrath JJCounsel: Applicant in PersonJ D Evans for RespondentJudgment: 13 April 2011JUDGMENT OF THE COURTThe application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs of $2,000 to the respondent.REASONSIgnoring the way in which the case proceeded in the Court of Appeal1 where he was represented by Senior Counsel, the applicant now tries to raise new grounds. We do not permit him to do so. The application is accordingly dismissed.Solicitors:Hayman Lawyers, Wellington for Respondent1 McGuire v Sheridan [2011] NZCA 15.