Wellington, Aug 5 NZPA - A small faction of woolgrowers who claim that their wool should not be lumped in with other merino wools for funding purposes are seeking a last-ditch stand in the Supreme Court. The Wool Board Disestablishment Company Ltd (DisCo) said that Saxon merino growers had applied for recall of a unanimous Supreme Court decision in favour of DisCo.

That July 3 decision was itself an appeal -- on narrow grounds -- in which the Supreme Court cleared a former Court of Appeal judge, Bill Wilson, over allegations of potential bias in his ruling against the woolgrowers.

The farmers complained that the former Wool Board's interests in the case were represented by Alan Galbraith QC, a co-owner of land on which he and Justice Wilson provided grazing for race horses.

Peter Radford, owner of Saxmere Co Ltd, and Escorial Co Ltd, Richard King, Russell Stewart Emmerson and Forest Range Ltd claimed Justice Wilson faced a potential conflict of interest in the case he heard.

The July decision by a full bench of the Supreme Court was important because if the appeal had succeeded, there could have been an appearance of a miscarriage of justice in one of the nation's highest courts.

Since the original appeal court decision, Justice Wilson has been appointed a Supreme Court judge.

Mr Radford has been behind a long-running series of lawsuits -- reported to have cost the parties involved over $1 million -- stemming from claims the Wool Board refused to recognise or fund Saxon fibre as a type of wool separate to other merino fibre.

The July finding -- that a "fair-minded lay observer" would reasonably understand that Justice Wilson brought an impartial mind to his judgment -- left Saxon farmers liable to pay DisCo another $15,000, plus "reasonable disbursements".

In the latest action, growers are trying to take advantage of a rule in the higher courts which provides for part or all or a judgment to be recalled.

But there are few guides as to the basis upon which a judgment can be recalled, or what a recall empowers a judge to do, though a 1968 case established three categories of recall.

One of these gave the courts the ability to recall a judgment for any very special reason which justice required, and thereby avoid an injustice, or what might otherwise be a more cumbersome and expensive process, such as a retrial.

DisCo is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wool Equities, but has it own independent board, and is responsible to the agriculture minister for settling the affairs of the Wool Board and distribution of remaining cash reserves to growers.

DisCo set aside funds of up to $7 million to fight any replay of legal action by farmers producing and selling Saxon merino wool, and is understood to have spent about half that -- though it has clawed back some of the money in successful court challenges.

Originally part of a contingency fund of $8.5 million, the leftover money is expected to be re-distributed to sheep farmers in a final wind-up of the board's affairs after legal actions have finished.

NZPA WGT kca mgr gt