The judge presiding over an Employment Court trial between Gloriavale leavers and the current community will visit the secretive Christian community next month.
Rose Standtrue, Pearl Valor, Serenity Pilgrim, Anna Courage, Crystal Loyal and Virginia Courage gave emotional evidence in court - along with family members supporting them - to prove their case.
The trial follows a similar action by a group of former Gloriavale men who the court ruled were employees from when they were just 6 years old, regularly undertaking “strenuous, difficult, and sometimes dangerous” work when they were still legally required to be at school.
The women’s case is set to continue next month and it was revealed last week that Chief Employment Court Judge Christina Inglis will visit the isolated Gloriavale site to better understand the evidence being presented in court.
Firstly, she said it was in the “broader interests of justice” it was “appropriate” to “conduct a viewing at Gloriavale.
“The purpose of the visit is to view the physical premises and relevant facilities to enable the Court to better understand the evidence presented in Court; there will be no discussion or engagement with residents by the Court,” she said in a decision released to the Herald.
She said the Gloriavale leadership had “helpfully provided a proposed itinerary, setting out the facilities that might usefully be viewed, together with a map of the property”.
During the visit, estimated to take about two hours, a representative of the Gloriavale community would be nominated to escort the Chief Judge and various lawyers for the Court and involved parties around the controversial property.
They would “provide an appropriate commentary on the physical layout of the buildings, facilities and the property in general”.
Chief Judge Inglis explained her second reason for the shift in location.
“It may be beneficial to reconvene part of the hearing on the West Coast,” she said.
“It was noted that such a step may be more convenient for remaining witnesses for the second defendants (the Gloriavale community) and could usefully be combined with any site visit.”
“While it is accepted that it is open to the Court to hear the case at a different venue, it is said that hearing part of the case in Greymouth would cause inconvenience and additional expense to the plaintiffs and their supporters, and disrupt travel and accommodation arrangements put in place for the reconvened hearing,” she said.
“The site visit, which the parties have sought, will necessitate travel to the West Coast.”
She acknowledged the leavers’ position but said holding part of the proceedings in Greymouth will “enable members of the public and others interested in the hearing to attend a local court to view the case”.
“In this regard (Gloriavale) have indicated that a significant number (of current) residents would wish to attend the hearing if it was held locally.
“Given the public interest in the proceedings, it may be that members of the West Coast community would also wish to attend court.
“I consider that the overall interests of justice will best be served by the court sitting in Greymouth during the week of 20–24 February 2023.”
Last month Gloriavale confirmed it would self-represent for the remainder of the trial - which will run over a number of weeks in February and March.
The community had previously been represented by Philip Skelton KC.
However, in a statement emailed to the Herald Gloriavale spokesman Samuel Valor said the community simply did not have the funds to continue working with the lawyer.
Valor and the four other “shepherds” - Howard Temple, Stephen Standfast, Noah Hopeful and Faithful Pilgrim - would “conduct their own counsel” assisted by Peter Righteous.
Valor said the shepherds were happy with the representation they had in the first part of the trial - but going forward they could not sustain the cost of a legal team.
“The prolonged and ongoing nature of this litigation, which is now scheduled to take twice as long as originally contemplated, has simply made it impossible for us to continue to use the community’s limited financial resources for legal representation,” the shepherds said in an affidavit provided to the court.
“We have reluctantly decided that we will not be represented by legal counsel for the remainder of this proceeding.”