LESLIE v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2023] NZHC 1116

LESLIE v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2023] NZHC 1116 [11May 2023]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDWHANGAREI REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROAWHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHECIV 2023-488-39[2023] NZHC 1116UNDER The Habeas Corpus Act 2001BETWEEN MARTIN ROBIN DION LESLIEApplicantAND THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THEDEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONSRespondentOn the papersCounsel: The applicant in personJudgment: 11 May 2023JUDGMENT OF CAMPBELL JThis judgment was delivered by me on 11 May 2023 at 10.00 am pursuant to Rule 11.5of the High Court RulesRegistrar/Deputy Registrar[1] Mr Leslie has tendered for filing a document that is styled an application fora writ of habeas corpus. The Registrar has referred the application to me under HighCourt Rule 5.35A.[2] Mr Leslie has named the Department of Corrections as the respondent. Herefers to a warrant to detain himself. I assume, though Mr Leslie does not say soexplicitly, that Mr Leslie is presently detained in prison.[3] Mr Leslie begins his application by saying:The legal name on the warrant to detain myself as the legal personality isa misrepresentation under the law, having resigned from the Office of thePerson.[4] Mr Leslie then says that the government enact statutes the terms and conditionsof which "depend for their effect upon the consent of the governed". He says thatstatutes are contracts and that the origin of all legal jurisdiction is consent. He saysbirth certificates are "a crown own copyright protected legal entity" and that "the legalname is not a living entity it is a legal entity, which requires representation byconsent". He says a particular (but unidentified) birth certificate (I assume the oneissued in respect of his birth) "was a contract created without my consent".[5] Mr Leslie then gives the following notice:Therefore be it now known to all concern and effected parties that, I Robin ofthe family Martin, do hereby state clearly and perceivically [sic] andunequivocally my intent to peacefully and lawfully withdraw my consent tobe governed as a legal personality in society.[6] Mr Leslie concludes by claiming, among many things, "the right to immunityfrom statute law and exemption from taxation, and legal jurisdiction".[7] The propositions put forward by Mr Leslie are all nonsensical. His noticeis legally ineffective. He cannot claim the right to immunity from statute law.Mr Leslie does not seek any relief in his application. For these reasons, the applicationis plainly an abuse of process. I strike out the application under r 5.35B of the HighCourt Rules 2016.[8] Mr Leslie has, under r 5.35B(3), the right to appeal against this decision.[9] I direct the Registrar to serve a copy of this decision on the Chief Executiveof the Department of Corrections.______________________Campbell J