RAZDAN RAFIQ v COMMISSIONER OF NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2015] NZSC 4

RAZDAN RAFIQ v COMMISSIONER OF NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2015] NZSC 4

Leave to appeal was dismissed because Wild J properly applied the Reekie principles; the proposed appeal did not raise any issue of general or public importance and the material did not demonstrate a risk of a substantial miscarriage of justice.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] NZSC 4
Parties
Applicant: Razdan Rafiq; Respondent: Commissioner of New Zealand Police
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
16 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave Application — Dismissed by Supreme Court
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Limitation Period (s 4(6 A)), Leave to Appeal, Costs
Defamation Limitation Act 1950 Civil Procedure Security for Costs Appeals Limitation Period (s 4(6 A)) Leave to Appeal Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Razdan Rafiq

Applicant

Commissioner of New Zealand Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave Application — Dismissed by Supreme Court

  1. 1 Whether the Registrar's decision refusing to dispense with security for costs was correctly reviewed by Wild J
  2. 2 Whether the proposed appeal raises an issue of general or public importance
  3. 3 Whether there is a substantial miscarriage of justice if leave is refused

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was dismissed because Wild J properly applied the Reekie principles; the proposed appeal did not raise any issue of general or public importance and the material did not demonstrate a risk of a substantial miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to respondent in the sum of $2,500