Cullum v Barfoot

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA16/2021
[2021] NZCA 76

BETWEEN	KATHRYN CULLUM Applicant
AND	KIRI BARFOOT Respondent

Counsel:	Applicant in person M Singh for Respondent
Judgment: (On the papers)	18 March 2021 at 11.00 am

JUDGMENT OF MILLER J
(On Recall of Decision)

The application for review is declined.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

Ms Cullum has applied for recall of my decision of 10 March 2021.
The application is itself an abuse of court process and is declined. I direct that the Registrar is to receive no further papers from Ms Cullum in connection with this proceeding.

Solicitors:
Glaister Ennor, Auckland for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Court of Appeal of New Zealand heard an application for recall of a previous decision in the matter of Cullum v Barfoot. The applicant, Kathryn Cullum, sought to recall the decision made by Miller J on 10 March 2021. The respondent, Kiri Barfoot, was represented by counsel. The applicant appeared in person and was not represented by counsel. The appeal centred around the applicant’s dissatisfaction with the earlier ruling and sought to have it reconsidered by the Court.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the application for recall of the earlier decision was an abuse of court process. The Court had to determine if the application was frivolous or vexatious, which would warrant a refusal to entertain the application and a direction that no further papers be received from the applicant. The Court had to balance the applicant’s right to seek review against the need to protect the integrity of the court process and prevent unnecessary delay and expense.

In assessing the application, the Court found that it constituted an abuse of process. The Court considered the nature and merits of the application and concluded that it was not made in good faith or for a proper purpose. The Court observed that the applicant had not presented any new evidence or argument that could warrant reconsideration of the earlier decision. The Court held that the application was an abuse of the court process and dismissed it accordingly. The Court further directed that no further papers were to be received from the applicant in connection with the proceeding.

As a result of the Court’s decision, the application for recall was declined. The Court also directed that the Registrar was to receive no further papers from the applicant in relation to the matter. This decision reinforces the importance of maintaining the integrity of the court process and preventing unnecessary litigation.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established