JIANMING HE V THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR HC WN CIV 2008-485-1300 [2009] NZHC 66 (5 February 2009)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
WELLINGTON REGISTRY
                                                              CIV 2008-485-1300



              IN THE MATTER OF  appeals pursuant to section 115 of the
                                Immigration Act 1987
 
            AND IN THE MATTER OF appeals against decisions of the
                                Residence Review Board

      
       BETWEEN                  JIANMING HE
                                       Appellant

              AND                 
    THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE
                                       DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR
                                     
 Respondent

                                                              CIV 2008-485-1845




              AND BETWEEN      
       JINBO LIANG
                                       Appellant

              AND                      THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF
THE
                                       DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR
                                       Respondent

             
                                                CIV 2008-485-1879



              AND BETWEEN              WENHAI LIANG
       
                               Appellant

              AND                      THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE
                    
                  DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR
                                       Respondent


Hearing:      5 February 2009

Counsel:
     R E Harrison QC for Appellants
              P McCarthy for Respondents


JIANMING HE V THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF LABOUR HC WN CIV 2008-485-
1300 5 February 2009

Judgment:       5 February 2009


                       JUDGMENT OF RONALD
YOUNG J



[1]     The respondent and appellant in each set of proceedings have sought leave to
appeal and cross appeal respectively
my Judgment of 13 November 2008.
Section 116 of the Immigration Act 1992 allows (ss (1)) any party who is dissatisfied
with any determination
of the High Court, as being erroneous in law, with leave of
that Court, to appeal to the Court of Appeal.


[2]     At ss (2) in
deciding whether to grant leave the Court:

        shall have regard to whether the question of law involved in the appeal is
 
      one which by reason of its general or public importance or for any other
        reason ought to be submitted to the Court
of Appeal for its decision.

[3]     Subsection (3) allows the imposition of conditions whether as to costs or
otherwise.


[4] 
   Neither counsel oppose the others application for leave to appeal. I agree this
is clearly a case whether questions of law raised
by both the respondent and
appellant are of general importance. I, therefore, grant leave to the respondent to
appeal and to the
appellant to cross appeal. No special directions or orders as to
costs are required.




                                       
                     _______________________
                                                                       Ronald Young
J

Solicitors:
R E Harrison QC, PO Box 1153, Auckland 1140, email: [e-mail]
P McCarthy, Crown Law Office, PO Box 2858, Wellington




                                                                                     2