RANI v RAJAN & ANOR CA231/2015 [2015] NZCA 281
The Registrar's decision to decline a fee waiver is confirmed because the applicant failed to demonstrate undue hardship; her financial position (modest income and liabilities, principal liability a hire purchase agreement) did not justify waiver.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] NZCA 281
- Parties
- Applicant: Santosh Rani; First Respondent: Deo Rajan; Second Respondent: Lydia Damayanthi Rajan
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 30 June 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Review of Registrar's Decision
- Outcome
- Application for review dismissed and Registrar's decision confirmed.
- Legal Topics
- Fee Waiver, Undue Hardship, Registrar Review, Judicature Act S100 B
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Santosh Rani
Applicant
Deo Rajan
First Respondent
Lydia Damayanthi Rajan
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Review of Registrar's Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Registrar erred in declining to waive court fees
- 2 Whether the applicant would suffer undue hardship if required to pay the fee
- 3 Application of s100B Judicature Act 1908 to fee waiver requests
Ratio Decidendi
The Registrar's decision to decline a fee waiver is confirmed because the applicant failed to demonstrate undue hardship; her financial position (modest income and liabilities, principal liability a hire purchase agreement) did not justify waiver.
Court Disposition
Application for review dismissed and Registrar's decision confirmed.
Orders
- Applicant must pay the fee of $1,100 to the Registrar by 30 July 2015
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
RANI v RAJAN & ANOR CA231/2015 [2015] NZCA 281 [30 June 2015]IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALANDCA231/2015[2015] NZCA 281BETWEEN SANTOSH RANIApplicantAND DEO RAJANFirst RespondentLYDIA DAMAYANTHI RAJANSecond RespondentCounsel: MSS Khan for ApplicantB Parshotam for RespondentJudgment:(On the papers)30 June 2015 at 11.00 amJUDGMENT OF MILLER J(Review of Registrar's decision)The application for review is dismissed. Ms Rani must pay the fee of $1,100 to the Registrar by 30 July 2015.____________________________________________________________________REASONS[1] Ms Rani applies for review of the Registrar's decision to decline to waivecourt fees for her appeal.1[2] I am satisfied that the Registrar was correct to decline to waive the fee. I too am not persuaded that Ms Rani would suffer undue hardship if required to pay the fee. She is reliant in part on a benefit, but she also has a modest income from what1 Section 100B Judicature Act 1908.appears to be a family business. Her principal liability is a hire purchase agreement. Other liabilities appear to be owed to family members.[3] The application for review is dismissed.[4] The Registrar's decision is confirmed. Ms Rani must pay the fee of $1,100 tothe Registrar by 30 July 2015.Solicitors:Parshotam Lawyers, Auckland for Respondent