Koroniadis v Bank of New Zealand

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA522/2013
[2013] NZCA 524

BETWEEN	ATHANASIOS KORONIADIS Appellant
AND	BANK OF NEW ZEALAND Respondent

Counsel:

Appellant in person
J Toebes for Respondent

Judgment:

(on the papers)

30 October 2013 at 2.30 pm

JUDGMENT OF MILLER J
(Review of Registrar’s decision declining to waive filing fee)

The application for review is granted.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

Mr Koroniadis has applied to review the Registrar’s decision declining to waive a filing fee of $1100. This requires that he demonstrate undue financial hardship.[1]
[1]Court of Appeal Fees Regulations 2001, reg 5(3)(b)(iii).
Mr Koroniadis is a student and is supported by welfare payments. At this stage I am not prepared to discount the reasons which he advances for some of the larger purchases on his bank statements. In the circumstances, the application for review is granted.
The effect of this decision is that Mr Koroniadis is not required to pay a filing fee on the application to extend time and the appeal itself.
It is important to note that this decision does not indicate that Mr Koroniadis will be able to avoid paying security for costs. Different considerations apply to that decision, including the interests of the respondent and the merits of the appeal.

Solicitors:
JTLAW, Wellington for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Athanasios Koroniadis, a student supported by welfare payments, sought review of the Court of Appeal's decision to decline his application for a waiver of a filing fee of $1100. The Court of Appeal Fees Regulations 2001, regulation 5(3)(b)(iii), stipulates that applicants must demonstrate undue financial hardship to qualify for a fee waiver. Koroniadis argued that he met this criterion, prompting the Court to consider his application.

The court had to determine whether Koroniadis' financial circumstances constituted undue hardship sufficient to warrant the waiver of the filing fee. The Registrar had previously declined to waive the fee, but Koroniadis' application for review raised questions about the adequacy of the evidence provided and the interpretation of his financial situation. The court considered Koroniadis' status as a student and his reliance on welfare payments, which may reasonably be expected to impose financial constraints.

Upon reviewing Koroniadis' submissions, the court found that he had presented credible reasons for some of the larger purchases seen in his bank statements. Given his student status and welfare dependency, the court concluded that Koroniadis had demonstrated undue financial hardship. Consequently, the application for review was granted, meaning Koroniadis would not have to pay the filing fee for the appeal or for the application to extend time. This decision does not, however, impact the requirement for Koroniadis to provide security for costs, as that decision involves separate considerations regarding the interests of the respondent and the merits of the appeal.

The final orders of the court were that the application for review was granted, and Koroniadis was not required to pay the filing fee for the appeal or for the application to extend time. The court's decision emphasized that this ruling did not affect the need for Koroniadis to provide security for costs.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established