JUSTO v BRIGGS [2016] NZCA 422
An extension of time to bring the appeal was granted because the delay was very short, resulted from an oversight by the applicant's legal representatives, caused no prejudice to the respondent and the respondent consented; the matter was appropriate to be dealt with on the papers.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] NZCA 422
- Parties
- Applicant: Richard James Justo; Respondent: Gavin Dwain Briggs
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 8 September 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Extension of Time to Appeal (civil) / On the Papers (application for Extension of Time)
- Outcome
- Extension of time granted
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Service of Appeal Documents, Applications on the Papers, Costs
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Richard James Justo
Applicant
Gavin Dwain Briggs
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal (civil) / On the Papers (application for Extension of Time)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an extension of time should be granted under r 29A of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005
- 2 Whether the short delay caused prejudice to the respondent
- 3 Whether the application could be dealt with on the papers
Ratio Decidendi
An extension of time to bring the appeal was granted because the delay was very short, resulted from an oversight by the applicant's legal representatives, caused no prejudice to the respondent and the respondent consented; the matter was appropriate to be dealt with on the papers.
Court Disposition
Extension of time granted
Orders
- Application for an extension of time in which to appeal granted
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
JUSTO v BRIGGS [2016] NZCA 422 [8 September 2016]IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALANDCA373/2016[2016] NZCA 422BETWEEN RICHARD JAMES JUSTOApplicantAND GAVIN DWAIN BRIGGSRespondentCounsel: L A Stevens for ApplicantS W Sansom for RespondentJudgment:(On the papers)8 September 2016 at 10.00 amJUDGMENT OF FRENCH JThe application for an extension of time in which to appeal is granted.___________________________________________________________________REASONS[1] The applicant, Mr Justo, wishes to appeal a judgment of Simon France J in the High Court at Nelson dated 30 June 2016.1 The last day for bringing the appeal within the time frames stipulated by r 29 of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 was 28 July 2016. Mr Justo's lawyers duly filed a notice of appeal in this Court on28 July 2016, but failed to serve it on the respondent. That was not actioned until 1 August 2016.1 Justo v Briggs [2016] NZHC 1464.[2] The failure to serve the appeal on the respondent by 28 July 2016 means Mr Justo is now required to seek an extension of time under r 29A in order to be able to proceed with his appeal.[3] The respondent initially opposed an extension of time being granted, but has changed his mind and now consents.[4] I am satisfied the matter may be dealt with on the papers and that in the circumstances the application should be granted. The delay was very short; it has not caused the respondent any prejudice; and it was due to an oversight on the part ofMr Justo's legal representatives.[5] The application for an extension of time in which to appeal is duly granted.[6] There is no order as to costs.Solicitors:Stevens Orchard Lawyers Ltd, Nelson for ApplicantRichmond Law, Nelson for Respondent