New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Prima facie case

Legal area

Court

21 Dec 2021

MATHIAS ORTMANN v UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [2021] NZSC 187

Citation

[2021] NZSC 187
Court

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court dismissed the applications for leave because the Court of Appeal had, on the record, engaged with the merits of the judicial review grounds on remittal and concluded the issues the applicants sought to revisit were not outstanding; the proposed fresh evidence would not have affected the prima facie assessment and no miscarriage of justice was shown; accordingly leave to appeal was refused and costs awarded.
12 Jul 2021

ORTMANN v THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [2021] NZCA 310

Citation

[2021] NZCA 310
Court

Court of Appeal

The remitted task was limited to identifying judicial review issues not addressed in the case stated appeals; the Court found no such outstanding issues because the matters appellants relied upon had been addressed on the merits previously or were trial‑level issues not pertinent to the extradition prima facie inquiry; proposed fresh US expert evidence and the Privacy Act enforcement application were declined as not relevant to the limited extradition assessment; appeals remitted by the Supreme Court were dismissed and costs ordered against appellants.
2 May 2018

RAFIQ v AUCKLAND TRANSPORT [2018] NZHC 907

Citation

[2018] NZHC 907
Court

High Court

The application was refused because the proposed causes of action had no realistic prospect of success and amounted to an abuse of process: the infringement allegation was supported by disclosure and made in good faith, and the alleged police remark could not sustain a viable defamation claim in the context of the applicant's vexatious litigant history; accordingly no prima facie case was shown and leave was refused.
8 Nov 2017

RAFIQ v THE COMMISSIONER OF NZ POLICE [2017] NZHC 2739

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2739
Court

High Court

Leave to commence the proposed defamation proceeding was refused because the draft statement of claim did not establish a prima facie case, was speculative and unsupported by affidavit, may be time-barred, and would amount to an abuse of process; the claim was therefore 'totally without merit' under the Senior Courts Act and leave was properly denied.
7 Sept 2012

SZONDY V THE DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND HC AK CIV-2012-404-001733

Citation

openlaw-d87d1c7e_5fd8_44d3_baf6_5a1019a0e9bf.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court held that the Hungarian charges, which allege the applicant led lenders into error and obtained money by misleading them about his ability to repay, fall within art II(6) of the extradition treaty (obtaining money by false pretences); s5(2)'s totality-of-conduct approach applies; and on the evidence a properly directed jury could convict, so a prima facie case was established; accordingly the judicial review application was dismissed.

New Zealand Case Law

MATHIAS ORTMANN v UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [2021] NZSC 187

ORTMANN v THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [2021] NZCA 310

RAFIQ v AUCKLAND TRANSPORT [2018] NZHC 907

RAFIQ v THE COMMISSIONER OF NZ POLICE [2017] NZHC 2739

SZONDY V THE DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND HC AK CIV-2012-404-001733