28 Jun 2013
The Court struck out and dismissed the proceedings because the plaintiff's statement of claim advanced legally untenable claims of personal sovereignty and a trust founded on the 1835 Declaration contrary to binding precedent, and because the pleading was prolix, unintelligible and in breach of High Court pleading rules, causing prejudice and delay and making a defence impossible to plead.
15 Dec 2006
Application dismissed because the applicant's core legal arguments had no real prospect of success: habeas corpus does not apply to animals; Anton Piller relief was misconceived where impoundment was lawful; the Dog Control Act covers the conduct and registration of dogs (and the animal described was objectively a dog), and novel sovereignty and definitional claims cannot place the applicant outside the law of New Zealand; consequently no interim mandatory injunction was justified and costs were ordered against the applicant.
28 Oct 2005
The Crown, as registered proprietor by acquisition under the Public Works Act 1928 and following valid statutory disestablishment of the school under the Education Act 1989 and Education Lands Act 1949, is entitled to immediate possession; appellants' claims of superior customary title and independent sovereignty do not disclose an arguable defence to the Crown's claim and are incompatible with New Zealand's constitutional and statutory order, so summary judgment and enforcement of the District Court orders are proper.