The Siemer Battles - Judges Remain In The Firing Line
LawFuel - The Law Jobs and News Wire

A contempt action, a settlement, a complaint, an appeal against a $1 million judgment . . and more

19 November 2009 - Vince Siemer, who faced the wrath of the Solicitor General this week with contempt of court proceedings that threatened him with imprisonment, has already filed a complaint against the High Court judge who heard the proceeding.

And the Auckland litigant has other judges in his sights with an appeal to be heard early next month relating to the $1 million defamation award made by Justice Cooper in December last year.

The recent contempt application came before Justice Graham Lang and was discontinued after the Solicitor General’s counsel indicated that the Solicitor General was satisfied that details of the Urewera ‘terror raids’ judgment had been removed from one of Siemer’s websites.

However, after the indication to the Court from the Solicitor General that the proceeding could now be withdrawn, the Judge indicated that he wanted Siemer to have a lawyer appointed and later indicated that he (the Judge) also wished additional parts of the judgment that he had highlighted to be removed from the site as well as those areas already requested to be removed.

In his complaint to the Office of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner (David Gascoigne), Siemer’s statement says:

“Again, the S-G (Solicitor General) had already – and repeatedly – informed the Court of his intent to withdraw the matter. Though this was a civil proceeding, it was one seeking my imprisonment. This makes the Judicial misconduct as contextually egregious as is is legally.

“The Judge was ostensibly a neutral party whose role of impartial adjudicator was completely at odds with his wholly inappropriate conduct. Bluntly stated, Lang J took up the role of plaintiff – with considerably more demands and force than the actual applicant – and did so in circumstances where the Court had already been advised the application was being withdrawn.

It is not unfair to state that judicial impartiality is the cornerstone of every honourable court system. Indeed, judicial bias which so overtly exceeds the legally-stated aim of one party strikes at the heart of any respected Court’s ability to survive if not promptly and forcefully dealt to. This is perhaps the worst, as well as easiest to prove, case of judicial misconduct from the bench that you have yet to see as Judicial Conduct Commissioner.”

In addition to his battle with the Solicitor General, Vince Siemer also has his long-running fight with Auckland insolvency practitioner Michael Stiassny and Ferrier Hodgson coming before the Court of Appeal in early December and which resulted in the million-dollar damages award. The appeal notice was filed on 12 January but has taken the year to be allocated a number and date.

The appeal claims that Moichael Stiassny had “misled the Court and abused process” through an affidavit filed in April 2005. He claims, among other matters, that Justice Cooper had overlooked obligations by Stiassny and his lawyer Robert Fardell QC, who subsequently died, of the relationship between Stiassny and Fardell.

In addition, the affidavit supporting the appeal notice claims that Justice Grant Hammond was also conflicted by virtue of his having been a “material witness” to conduct by Justice Hammond and which lead to an alleged personal attack upon Siemer.

ENDS

© Scoop Media