The Wanaka Gym Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

SC 84/2014
[2014] NZSC 124

BETWEEN	THE WANAKA GYM LIMITED Applicant
AND	QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent

SC 85/2014
BETWEEN	FIONA CAROLINE GRAHAM Applicant
AND	QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent

Counsel:	Applicants in person R S Cunliffe and T J Surrey for Respondent
Judgment:	12 September 2014

JUDGMENT OF WILLIAM YOUNG J

A An extension of time to file submissions is granted.

BSubmissions in support of the applications for leave to appeal must be filed on or before 28 November 2014.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

The applicants seek an extension of time to file submissions in support of the applications for leave to appeal. Dr Fiona Graham also seeks what in effect is a stay in relation to the payment of the fines imposed in the District Court. Dr Graham was fined $24,000 and will be arrested if she returns to New Zealand, as she wishes to do for the purpose of preparing submissions in support of the applications for leave to appeal. She is currently living and working in Japan.
In issue are convictions entered and sentences imposed in the District Court in respect of offending under the Building Act 2004.[1] The applicants’ appeals against conviction and sentence were dismissed in the High Court.[2] Subsequent applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal were dismissed by the High Court[3] and Court of Appeal.[4] There being no right of appeal in respect of the leave decisions, the applicants seek leave to appeal directly to this Court against the judgment of the High Court dismissing their appeals from the District Court. Leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court will only be granted in exceptional circumstances under s 14 of the Supreme Court Act 2003.
[1]Queenstown Lakes District Council v The Wanaka Gym Ltd DC Queenstown CRN-8059500156, 19 April 2010.
[2]The Wanaka Gym Ltd v Queenstown Lakes District Council [2012] NZHC 284.
[3]The Wanaka Gym Ltd v Queenstown Lakes District Council [2012] NZHC 2662.
[4]The Wanaka Gym Ltd v Queenstown Lakes District Council [2013] NZCA 397.
Dr Graham is seeking legal aid for the proposed appeal and I would be prepared to extend the time for filing submissions in any event. The deadline for filing submissions is extended until 28 November 2014.
I am not prepared to issue a stay in relation to the fines. It seems to me that submissions as to whether leave to appeal should be granted should be able to be made based on the judgments of the District Court, High Court and Court of Appeal.

Solicitors:
Macalister Todd Phillips, Queenstown for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Wanaka Gym Limited, along with Dr Fiona Caroline Graham, applied to the Supreme Court of New Zealand for an extension of time to file submissions in support of their appeals against convictions and sentences imposed under the Building Act 2004. The Queenstown Lakes District Council opposed the applications. The applicants’ appeals against their convictions and sentences had been dismissed in the High Court, and subsequent applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal were also dismissed. As a result, the applicants sought leave to appeal directly to the Supreme Court against the judgment of the High Court. Dr Graham also sought a stay in relation to the payment of the fines imposed in the District Court, as she wished to return to New Zealand to prepare her submissions but faced potential arrest due to the outstanding fines.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the applicants were entitled to an extension of time to file their submissions in support of the appeals for leave, and whether Dr Graham should be granted a stay in relation to the payment of the fines. Given the exceptional circumstances under section 14 of the Supreme Court Act 2003, the court was required to determine whether the applicants' case warranted an extension of time and a stay in relation to the fines.

In granting the extension of time, the court noted that Dr Graham was seeking legal aid for the proposed appeal, and that submissions could be made based on the judgments of the lower courts. However, the court was not prepared to issue a stay in relation to the fines imposed in the District Court. The court found that the applicants should be able to make their submissions based on the existing judgments, and that the fines should not be stayed. Consequently, the deadline for filing submissions was extended to 28 November 2014.

The court did not grant the stay in relation to the fines but did extend the time for filing submissions in support of the applications for leave to appeal. The applicants were thus given an opportunity to present their cases to the Supreme Court.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established