LEE VANDERVIS v DUNEDIN CITY COUNCIL [2022] NZSC 110

LEE VANDERVIS v DUNEDIN CITY COUNCIL [2022] NZSC 110

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the challenged matters were concurrent factual findings supported by evidence, raised no question of public importance and disclosed no appearance of miscarriage of justice; therefore leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was not justified.

Citation
[2022] NZSC 110
Parties
Applicant: Lee Vandervis; First Respondent: Dunedin City Council; Second Respondent: David Benham
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
16 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court (dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Code of Conduct, Natural Justice, Judicial Review, Leave to Appeal
Administrative Law Local Government Law Procedural Fairness Code of Conduct Natural Justice Judicial Review Leave to Appeal

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Vandervis

Applicant

Dunedin City Council

First Respondent

David Benham

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in accepting evidence and findings that the applicant attempted to influence a Council employee to cancel a parking ticket
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was given sufficient notice of the gist of the complaint and an opportunity to respond
  3. 3 Whether concurrent factual findings of the High Court and Court of Appeal disclose an arguable point of public importance or miscarriage of justice warranting leave

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the challenged matters were concurrent factual findings supported by evidence, raised no question of public importance and disclosed no appearance of miscarriage of justice; therefore leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was not justified.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed
  • Applicant to pay respondents costs of $2,500