BRIGHT V NEW ZEALAND POLICE SC 51/2009
The proposed ground of appeal was not arguable because the LGOIM Act does not exclude the application of the Trespass Act 1980 and the two statutes can operate consecutively; therefore leave to appeal was dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- SC 51/2009
- Parties
- Applicant: Penelope Mary Bright; Respondent: New Zealand Police
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 6 August 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court (dismissed)
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Trespass, Local Authority Meetings, Section 50 LGOIM Act, Exclusivity of Statutory Remedies, Leave to Appeal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Penelope Mary Bright
Applicant
New Zealand Police
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court (dismissed)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Trespass Act 1980 could be invoked where the incident was dealt with under s50 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
- 2 Whether the LGOIM Act is exhaustive of the local authority's powers in relation to disorderly behaviour at meetings
- 3 Whether two statutes can operate consecutively in the context of local authority meetings
Ratio Decidendi
The proposed ground of appeal was not arguable because the LGOIM Act does not exclude the application of the Trespass Act 1980 and the two statutes can operate consecutively; therefore leave to appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Orders
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
BRIGHT V NEW ZEALAND POLICE SC 51/2009 6 August 2009IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 51/2009 [2009] NZSC 85 PENELOPE MARY BRIGHTvNEW ZEALAND POLICECourt: Blanchard, McGrath and Wilson JJ Counsel: Applicant in person F E Guy Kidd for Crown Judgment: 6 August 2009JUDGMENT OF THE COURT The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. REASONS[1] The applicant's appeals against her conviction for trespass following her exclusion from a local authority meeting on account of her disorderly behaviour have been dismissed in the High Court 1 and Court of Appeal.2 She wishes to argue that the Trespass Act 1980 could not be invoked because the incident had been dealt with1 Bright v Police (unreported, High Court, Auckland, CRI-2007-404-301, Andrews J, 30 May 2008).2 Bright v Police [2009] NZAR 324 (Glazebrook, Hammond and Chambers JJ).under s 50 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (the LGOIM Act), which she says is exhaustive of the relevant powers of the local authority in such circumstances. [2] If this were a truly arguable point, it would raise a question of public and general importance but, for the reasons given by the Court of Appeal, we are satisfied that the proposed ground of appeal is not arguable. In particular, we agree with that Court that the two statutes can operate consecutively in the circumstances of a local authority meeting and that the LGOIM Act does not exclusively govern the situation.Solicitors: Crown Law Office, Wellington