27 Jul 2023
The Deputy Registrar was correct to decline to consider the renewed application because the applicant showed no change in circumstances and was re-arguing points already rejected; therefore the review application was dismissed.
11 Jun 2021
Given the applicant's repeated attempts and prior adverse decisions exhausting appeal rights, the proposed leave to appeal is specific to the applicant and not a matter of general or public importance; therefore the Deputy Registrar correctly refused the fee waiver and the application is an abuse of process and must be dismissed.
29 May 2018
Because the applicant supplied the requested documents showing he is a beneficiary of Work and Income NZ, he demonstrated inability to pay and the Registrar's refusal to waive the filing fee was set aside.
14 Mar 2018
The application for review of the Registrar's decision was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate undue hardship or provide evidence that the appeal would not proceed without a refund; consequently the statutory prerequisites in regs 5 and 8 were not satisfied and the refund was properly refused.
22 Feb 2017
The Registrar correctly refused to waive the filing fee because the proposed appeal to the Supreme Court did not raise any question of law of significant public interest and the underlying appeal lacked merit and concerned only case‑specific facts; accordingly the public‑interest threshold for fee waiver was not met.
4 Aug 2016
The application for recall was declined because the appellant failed to show the cited authorities created uncertainty that would render his appeal a matter of public interest justifying waiver of the filing fee; established principles on costs remain settled and do not support waiver.
26 Nov 2014
Because the Dryson report was material to the central issue of vocational independence and was likely overlooked by the District Court, the District Court decision was quashed and the matter remitted for rehearing to ensure a fair determination; the filing fee was waived because the appellant was not at fault, the appeal proceeded with respondent's agreement, and the appellant had limited means.
6 Oct 2014
The application to recall the judgment is dismissed because the Court had addressed the relevant issues, no very special reason to recall exists, the appeal's merits were highly problematic, and an alternative remedy was available to the appellant.
20 May 2014
The Deputy Registrar was correct to refuse waiver where no financial information about the Trust was provided; however, upon receipt of a statutory declaration showing the Trust has no assets or cash other than the disputed debt, the Court grants the review and waives the $1,100 filing fee because the new evidence establishes undue hardship.
18 Jul 2013
The applicant failed to provide sufficient credible information to establish undue financial hardship under reg 5(3)(b)(iii) of the Supreme Court Fees Regulations 2003; unexplained bank deposits and expenditure patterns supported the Registrar's conclusion that the waiver should be refused, so the review is dismissed and the Registrar's decision confirmed.