SUPREME COURT

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27402, 15 July 1954, Page 9

SUPREME COURT

WRIT OF MANDAMUS SOUGHT PROCEEDINGS DESCRIBED AS VEXATIOUS “It seems to me that this claim Is really an abuse of the processes of the Court,” said Mr Justice McGregor when an application by Thomas John Downes, a clicker, for a writ of mandamus came before him in. the Supreme Court yesterday. Downes appeared on his own behalf. The Crown Solicitor (Mr A. W. Brown) appeared for F. F. Reid, Stipendiary Magistrate, in Christchurch; the Maintenance Officer in Timaru; the Registrar of the Magistrate’s Court in Timaru; and the Registrar of Social Security in Timaru. In his statement of claim Downes said that on November 23, 1949, at Timaru, a maintenance order was made against him in favour of his wife, Noreen Ethel Downes; that the order was obtained not on the merits of the /case; that he had attempted to file an application for a rehearing of the case, but the Magistrate in Christchurch had refused to allow the application to be filed. Downes claimed that the Magistrate was wrong in law/and he asked the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus that the Magistrate direct the Registrar to file his application for a rehearing. Downes also asked for a writ prohibiting the Maintenance Officer from proceeding against him on an information for disobedience of the maintenance order. When the case was called, Downes told his Honour that the papers were served on May 17. The defence was filed on July 6, and he filed an order on July 9 for the production of certain documents. Nothing further had been done, and he asked for an adjournment until the pleadings were complete. Mr Brown said it seemed that the case could not go on. The whole matter was completely without merit, but Downes insisted on an order for the discovery of documents. The defendants were scattered, and it had not been possible to get in touch with them all in time. Downes had brought the position on himself. His Honour-. It seems to me the , claim is really aii abuse of the processes of the Court. “There is no doubt abOPt that, sir,” replied Mr Brown. “He is a litigious , person and these proceedings are vexatious. There have been previous attempts to obtain a rehearing and they have been dismissed. This is a further i attempt to obtain a rehearing. There ■ are documents Downes is technically t entitled to have produced, and an ad- ■ journment will be necessary for that i to be done.” “Seeing that you £re consenting, Mr . Brown, I will grant an adjournment. . Otherwise I / have grave doubts . whether I should not strike out The whole proceedings,” said his Honour. There was a maintenance order ■ against Downes, and he had made no • payments whatever, said Mr Brown. . Proceedings were being taken against I Downes on Monday, bu* »thev could ; not go on until the present matter was ■ decided. If the Court would grant ’ an adjournment until Friday he could , probably have the necessary docuj ments filed by then. His Honour adjourned the hearing ; until Friday morning. /