Dear Ministry of Justice,

Does the Justice Department in New Zealand allow solicitors as officers of the Court to Act for both sides in proceedings before the Court of Appeal?
Yours faithfully,

John Creser

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Here is the email sent to day which explains the reasons for this request.

The documents attached to this email are now subject to a petition- https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/petition....

I'm writing to invite the Justice Department to provide the Justice Select Committee with an explanation for the two materially different decisions in this case. I've attached your guidelines on creating a fraud and corruption policy, and request your advice as to how they've been applied to the exigencies in this matter.

Please think of it like this,

I went to the Court of Appeal,
the Court agreed with me that the case was between me and the estate
I signed a $20,000 lien against my share of the estate to cover the costs
The court ordered costs against me in favour of the estate,
The lawyer and the registar produced another judgment awarding the costs to someone else.
I was bankrupted over a debt they now say was owed to my trustee personally.
The fraudulent order remained undisclosed for 12 years,it was never before the High Court.
I'm asking the Justice Department to accept the decision and orders of the Court of Appeal dated 8 October 2003.
I'm asking the Justice Department to reject a forgery created by a lawyer and registrar independent of any judicial function on 14 October 2003.

A Fraud upon the court

Fraud on the court is where a material misrepresentation has been made to the court, or by the court itself. The main requirement is that the impartiality of the court has been so disrupted that it can’t perform its tasks without bias or prejudice. It’s important to note that fraud on the court only involves court officials or officers of the court, such as judges or court-appointed attorneys. The fraud must be directed at the “judicial machinery” itself.

Claire Brown was the registrar of the Court of Appeal. On 8 October 2003 the Court made a decision and issued orders awarding court costs against me in favor of my mother's estate.

On 14 October 2003, Roger Chapman and Claire Brown conspired to change the decision and orders of the Court by altering a judgment to make it appear that the costs had been awarded to a trustee of the estate in her personal capacity. I was then bankrupted by Roger Chapman acting for a single trustee in her personal capacity against the estate.

This "judgment" was concealed for 12 Years by the court and was not disclosed until 2015. Could the Justice Department please advise why it was not disclosed to the parties or placed on the High Court file?

This document is also prima facie evidence the solicitor had a clear conflict of interest by contemporaneously acting for both the estate and a trustee taking a personal action against the estate. Does the Justice Department in New Zealand allow solicitors as officers of the Court to act for both sides in proceedings before the Court of Appeal?

Yours faithfully,

John Creser