Applications by Vincent Ross Siemer

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

[2016] NZSC 28

BETWEEN

RICHARD JOHN CRESER
Applicant

AND

JANINE CRESER
First Respondent

THE OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE
Second Respondent

AND

IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATIONS BY VINCENT ROSS SIEMER FOR ACCESS TO COURT DOCUMENTS

Court:	Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and OʼRegan JJ
Counsel:	V R Siemer in person
Judgment:	22 March 2016

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The challenges to the decisions refusing access to court documents are dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

The applicant, Mr Siemer, challenges two minutes refusing his requests for access to court documents, being
(a)a minute of William Young J dated 29 October 2015 denying a request for access to documents filed in relation to SC 46/2015; and
(b)a minute of O’Regan J dated 15 February 2016 which denied Mr Siemer’s requests for access to court documents dated 26 December 2015 and 17 January 2016.
The decisions in question were made in accordance with the procedure described in Greer v Smith.[1] One of Mr Siemer’s applications, in respect of the minute of William Young J, proceeds on the basis that his decision may be discharged or varied under s 28(3) of the Supreme Court Act 2003. For the reasons explained in Greer v Smith we do not agree.[2] The other, in respect of O’Regan J’s minute, purports to be by way of “appeal/review”.[3] There is, however, no right of review or appeal. We also see no reason why the original decisions should not stand.
[1]Greer v Smith [2015] NZSC 196.
[2]At [9].
[3]The coversheet suggests also that it is by way of review. O’Regan J has separately issued a minute indicating that he does not propose to take any steps in response to the application.
The challenges are accordingly dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case, Applications by Vincent Ross Siemer, involved a challenge by Mr Siemer against two decisions which had denied him access to court documents. The matter was heard by the Supreme Court of New Zealand, with the bench consisting of Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, and O’Regan JJ. Mr Siemer was unrepresented by counsel and appeared in person. The judgment was delivered on 22 March 2016.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the denials of access to court documents could be reviewed or appealed. Specifically, Mr Siemer sought to challenge a minute dated 29 October 2015 by William Young J and another dated 15 February 2016 by O’Regan J. Both decisions had refused his requests for access to certain documents filed in relation to SC 46/2015 and other dates. Mr Siemer's applications proceeded on the basis that the decisions could be discharged or varied under section 28(3) of the Supreme Court Act 2003, and also by way of review.

The Court held that the decisions could not be reviewed or appealed. It referenced the earlier decision in Greer v Smith, which established that such decisions are not subject to review or appeal. The Court found that the decisions in question were made in accordance with the procedure outlined in Greer v Smith, and there was no basis on which to discharge or vary them. The Court dismissed the challenges to the decisions, finding that there was no reason why the original decisions should not stand.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established