Haslam v Police

[2015] NZHC 249

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI 2014-404-000212 [2015] NZHC 249

BETWEEN

GEORGE HENRY HASLAM

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing:	23 February 2015
Appearances:	No Appearance by or for the Appellant S McKone for the Respondent
Judgment:	23 February 2015

[ORAL] JUDGMENT OF WYLIE J

HASLAM v POLICE [2015] NZHC 249 [23 February 2015]

[1]      On 13 June 2014, Judge J Bergseng sentenced the appellant, Mr Haslam, to

120 hours’ community work and disqualified him from driving for one year and one day, after Mr Haslam pleaded guilty to one charge of driving while disqualified on a third or subsequent occasion.

[2]      On the same day, Mr Haslam lodged an appeal.   The appeal asserted that Judge Bergseng erred in declining to substitute a community-based sentence for the period of disqualification.

[3]      The appeal was called before Woolford J on 10 October 2014.  There was no appearance by Mr Haslam.   He had, however, been in contact with the Court and Woolford J afforded him a further opportunity to attend the Court to advance his appeal. The appeal was adjourned for two weeks until 24 October 2014. The minute issued recorded that if there was no appearance by or on behalf of Mr Haslam on that date, his appeal was at risk of being struck out for want of prosecution.

[4]      The matter came before Woolford J again on 24 October 2014.   On this occasion, Mr Haslam was present.  Mr Haslam advised Woolford J that he had been initially refused legal aid, but that he had sought a review of that decision.  In the circumstances, Woolford J adjourned the appeal until Friday, 21 November 2014. He also recorded that Mr Haslam had advised him that if legal aid was refused, he would be instructing a lawyer privately.

[5]      The  matter  came  before  Woolford  J  yet  again  on  21  November  2014. Mr Haslam appeared again.  He told Woolford J that his review against the refusal of legal aid had been declined.  Mr Haslam told the Court that he wished to instruct a lawyer privately, and he sought a two-week adjournment to enable that to occur.  The matter was accordingly adjourned to 5 December 2014.

[6]      On 5 December 2014, Thomas J set the appeal down for hearing on today’s date.  She put in place a timetable requiring Mr Haslam to file any submissions and supporting materials on or before 5.00 pm on 2 February 2015.   Mr Haslam was present.

[7]      The  matter  was  called  before  me  today.    There  was  no  appearance  by Mr Haslam  at 10.00 am.   I stood  the matter down to 10.45  am.   Ms  McKone appearing for the respondent – the New Zealand Police – endeavoured to contact Mr Haslam.   She sent him a text telling him that the appeal was to be heard at

10.45 am.  She received a response from Mr Haslam indicating that he was unaware of the date of the hearing and also querying whether she was acting for him or the police.

[8]      I do not accept that Mr Haslam was ignorant of the hearing date.  He was in

Court  when  Thomas  J  allocated  the  fixture  and  made  the  timetable  orders  on

5 December 2014.  Further, he failed to file submissions within the time directed by Thomas J.  He was chased up by the registrar by email in early February 2015 and requested to file his submissions.   He responded to those emails, but still filed nothing.   There was a further chase up to him by email on or about 16 February

2015. Again, Mr Haslam did nothing.

[9]      In the circumstances, the appeal is struck out for want of prosecution.

[10]   I am told by Ms McKone that Mr Haslam did not seek to stay the disqualification order pending the hearing of the appeal.   Accordingly, no further

orders are required from me.

Wylie J