Slavich v Attorney-General

[2019] NZCA 342

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

 CA772/2018
 [2019] NZCA 342

BETWEEN	JOHN KENNETH SLAVICH Applicant
AND	ATTORNEY-GENERAL Respondent

Judgment:
(On the papers) 29 July 2019 at 3.30 pm

JUDGMENT OF COURTNEY J
[Review of Deputy Registrar’s decision]

The application for review of the Deputy Registrar’s decision is declined.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

1. Mr Slavich has been declared a vexatious litigant and, as such, cannot institute or continue any civil proceedings without the leave of the High Court (subject to matters on foot in CIV-2012-404-6353 as at 27 March 2013).[1]  In a minute dated 24 March 2015 Winkelmann J made a direction in CIV-2012-404-6353 that no further applications or correspondence were to be received by the High Court Registry in respect of the order declaring him to be a vexatious litigant.

   [1]Attorney-General v Slavich [2013] NZHC 627.

2. On 17 September 2018 Mr Slavich sought to file an application in the High Court to recall the judgment in that proceeding on the basis that fresh evidence had come to light.  A Deputy Registrar refused to accept the application for filing.  Mr Slavich requested a review of the Deputy Registrar’s decision.  The Registrar declined to action that request.  Mr Slavich wrote to the Chief High Court Judge, Venning J, requesting that he direct the Registrar to action his request for a review of the Deputy Registrar’s decision.  Venning J refused on the basis that the Deputy Registrar was acting in compliance with Winkelmann J’s minute of 24 March 2015 and that the decision was therefore not amenable to being reviewed. 

3. On 14 December 2018 Mr Slavich filed a document in this Court entitled “Notice of appeal or as the alternative a late notice of appeal” in which he sought to appeal “the decision of Justice Venning or as the alternative a late Notice of Appeal of the Minute decision of Justice Winkelmann dated 24 March 2015”.  A Deputy Registrar of this Court responded:

   We acknowledge receipt of your documents filed on 13 December 2018.  This document has been accepted as a R29A application for an extension of time to appeal the Minute of Winkelmann J of 24 March 2015.

4. Although Mr Slavich’s notice had been explicitly styled as the alternatives of a notice of appeal against Venning J’s decision or a late notice of appeal against Winkelmann J’s minute it is evident that the Deputy Registrar approached the filing on the basis that Venning J’s letter was not a judgment capable of appeal (it was not in the form of a judgment or minute and did not purport to exercise any judicial power.

5. Mr Slavich took a different view. He asked what the Court’s position was on the application relating to the appeal of Venning J’s decision.  The Deputy Registrar confirmed the earlier position.  Mr Slavich has requested a review of the Deputy Registrar’s decision not to accept the notice of appeal against Venning J’s decision for filing i.e. review under r 5A(3) of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005. 

6. The Deputy Registrar acted correctly. Venning J’s letter was simply a response to the request contained in Mr Slavich’s earlier letter.  It was not a decision that attracted any right of appeal.

7. The application for review is declined.  Only the application to extend time for appealing against Winkelmann J’s minute falls for determination.