Rafiq

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2013-404-004586 [2013] NZHC 2860

IN THE MATTER of an application to review

BY RAZDAN RAFIQ Applicant

Hearing: On the papers

Judgment: 30 October 2013

JUDGMENT OF VENNING J

(Review of Registrar's decision declining refund of fees)

This judgment was delivered by me on 30 October 2013 at 3.00 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High
Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date……………

Copy to: Applicant

Rafiq (2) [2013] NZHC 2860 [30 October 2013]

[1] Mr Rafiq applies to review the Registrar’s decision declining his application

for a refund of fees.

[2] The application for refund refers to a proceeding filed by Mr Rafiq against the Chief Executive, Department of Labour. Those proceedings were stayed as Mr Rafiq failed to pay security as directed by Priestley J on 17 May 2013.1

[3] Mr Rafiq applies for a refund of the filing fees. Although he has set out some very brief financial details stating his weekly income after tax was $240 (self-earned) and refers to expenses of $240 (rent $140 and food/grocers $100) no further detail is provided of his means. It appears his main complaint as stated is that in his consideration justice has not been “procured” by the litigation.

[4] The application for the refund is accompanied by a document containing scandalous and offensive comments about the judiciary. It is apparently based on Mr Rafiq’s dissatisfaction with the outcome of the process as much as anything else.

[5] The power to refund fees is provided for by reg 23 of the High Court Fees Regulations 2013. For the reasons given in a judgment of 29 October 2013 on an application by Mr Rafiq for review of the Registrar’s decision declining to waiver filing fee, I am satisfied that if an application for fee waiver had been made prior to the fee being paid the application would not have been granted. The criteria for a refund is not made out.

[6] The application for review is dismissed.

Venning J

1 Rafiq v CE of the Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment [2013] NZHC 1134.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mr Rafiq sought a review of the Registrar's decision to deny his application for a refund of fees. His original proceeding against the Chief Executive of the Department of Labour was stayed due to his failure to pay the required security as ordered by Priestley J on May 17, 2013. The refund application included limited financial details, with Mr Rafiq's weekly income after tax amounting to $240 and expenses of $240 (rent $140 and food/groceries $100). However, no further details regarding his means were provided. The main complaint appeared to be that justice had not been served through the litigation process.

The legal issues in the case involved the power to refund fees, as outlined in regulation 23 of the High Court Fees Regulations 2013. The court had to determine whether the criteria for a refund were met and whether an application for a fee waiver would have been granted if made prior to the fee being paid. The application for review was based on Mr Rafiq's dissatisfaction with the outcome of the process, which was accompanied by a document containing scandalous and offensive comments about the judiciary.

Venning J dismissed the application for review. The court determined that if an application for a fee waiver had been made prior to the fee being paid, it would not have been granted. As such, the criteria for a refund were not met. The court concluded that the Registrar's decision to decline the refund of fees was correct, and the application for review was dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established