MALCOLM EDWARD RABSON v TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED [2016] NZSC 22
The application to recall was dismissed because the applicant's submissions did not establish any fresh evidence, procedural irregularity or error of law sufficient to justify recalling the Court's prior judgment.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] NZSC 22
- Parties
- Applicant: Malcolm Edward Rabson; Respondent: Transparency International New Zealand Incorporated
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 15 March 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Application to Recall Supreme Court Judgment Dismissing Leave to Appeal / Recall Application After Dismissal of Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Recall application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Recall of Judgment, Leave to Appeal, Strike Out, Costs
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Malcolm Edward Rabson
Applicant
Transparency International New Zealand Incorporated
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application to Recall Supreme Court Judgment Dismissing Leave to Appeal / Recall Application After Dismissal of Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there were sufficient grounds to recall the Court's judgment dismissing leave to appeal
- 2 Whether the applicant's submissions established fresh evidence, procedural irregularity or a legal error warranting recall
Ratio Decidendi
The application to recall was dismissed because the applicant's submissions did not establish any fresh evidence, procedural irregularity or error of law sufficient to justify recalling the Court's prior judgment.
Court Disposition
Recall application dismissed
Orders
- Recall application dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
MALCOLM EDWARD RABSON v TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED [2016] NZSC 22 [15 March 2016]IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDSC 129/2015[2016] NZSC 22BETWEEN MALCOLM EDWARD RABSONApplicantAND TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONALNEW ZEALAND INCORPORATEDRespondentCourt: William Young, Arnold and OʼRegan JJCounsel: Applicant in personD R Kalderimis and K E Yesberg for RespondentJudgment: 15 March 2016JUDGMENT OF THE COURTThe recall application is dismissed.____________________________________________________________________REASONS[1] The applicant seeks a recall of our judgment of 16 February 2016 dismissing his application for leave to appeal against a judgment striking out his appeal and ordering him to pay costs.[2] There is nothing in the submissions he has made in support of his application to warrant recall. The application is accordingly dismissed.Solicitors:Chapman Tripp, Wellington for Respondent