PETER GERARD STOCKMAN v NEW ZEALAND ASSOCIATION OF COUNSELLORS INCORPORATED [2016] NZSC 18
Leave to appeal was refused because the matters complained of did not raise questions of general or public importance and there was no appearance of a miscarriage of justice; accordingly it was not in the interests of justice to hear the appeal.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] NZSC 18
- Parties
- Applicant: Peter Gerard Stockman; Respondent: New Zealand Association of Counsellors Incorporated
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 29 February 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court From Court of Appeal Decisions on Recall and Costs / Supreme Court Leave Application
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Recall of Judgment, Indemnity Costs, Standard Costs, Admission of Fresh Evidence
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Peter Gerard Stockman
Applicant
New Zealand Association of Counsellors Incorporated
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court From Court of Appeal Decisions on Recall and Costs / Supreme Court Leave Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted to recall the Court of Appeal's refusal to recall its judgment
- 2 Whether the Court of Appeal's award of standard costs rather than indemnity costs was wrong
- 3 Whether the appellant demonstrated a miscarriage of justice or an issue of public or general importance warranting Supreme Court intervention
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was refused because the matters complained of did not raise questions of general or public importance and there was no appearance of a miscarriage of justice; accordingly it was not in the interests of justice to hear the appeal.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Orders
- Leave to appeal dismissed
- No order for costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
PETER GERARD STOCKMAN v NEW ZEALAND ASSOCIATION OF COUNSELLORS INCORPORATED [2016] NZSC 18 [29 February 2016]NOTE: ORDER OF THE HIGH COURT PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OFNAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OFTHIRD PARTY REMAINS IN FORCE.IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDSC 2/2016[2016] NZSC 18BETWEEN PETER GERARD STOCKMANApplicantAND NEW ZEALAND ASSOCIATION OFCOUNSELLORS INCORPORATEDRespondentCourt: William Young, Glazebrook and Arnold JJCounsel: Applicant in personC Heaton for RespondentJudgment: 29 February 2016JUDGMENT OF THE COURTA The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.B There is no order for costs.____________________________________________________________________REASONS[1] The respondent, the New Zealand Association of Counsellors Inc, filed an appeal against a decision of Peters J in which the Judge upheld an application for judicial review by the applicant, Mr Stockman.1 The application was against a decision by the Association to exclude certain evidence that was relevant to a complaint made by Mr Stockman to the Association against another counsellor.[2] Before hearing, the Association abandoned its appeal. Mr Stockman then applied for an order of indemnity costs against the Association and sought leave to1 Stockman v New Zealand Association of Counsellors Inc [2013] NZHC 2267.file additional evidence to support his claim. In the alternative, Mr Stockman sought an award of costs for a standard appeal. The Court of Appeal declined the applications to adduce further evidence and for indemnity costs, but awarded Mr Stockman costs of $4,460 for standard appeal, reflecting the fact that he was represented by counsel in the appeal up until the time of its abandonment.2[3] Mr Stockman then applied to the Court of Appeal to recall its judgment, on the basis that the Court had not been impartial in considering his applications because he was, by that stage, acting for himself. Mr Stockman's recall application was declined.3 Mr Stockman now asks this Court to give leave to appeal against that decision. The Association has advised that it does not wish to be heard on the application and abides the decision of the Court.[4] We are not satisfied that it necessary in the interests of justice that we hear and determine this appeal. The decision of the Court of Appeal on Mr Stockman'srecall application involves no issue of general or public importance, nor is there anyappearance of a miscarriage of justice. The same is true of the Court of Appeal'sdecision on costs which Mr Stockman sought to recall.[5] The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. As the respondent made no submissions, we make no order for costs.Solicitors:Morrison Kent, Wellington for Respondent2 New Zealand Association of Counsellors Inc v Stockman [2015] NZCA 542 (Randerson, French and Winkelmann JJ).3 New Zealand Association of Counsellors Inc v Stockman [2015] NZCA 629 (Randerson, French and Winkelmann JJ).