Prasad v Indiana Publications (NZ) Ltd

[2014] NZSC 78

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

SC 47/2014
[2014] NZSC 78

BETWEEN	RAJENDRA PRASAD Applicant
AND	INDIANA PUBLICATIONS (NZ) LIMITED Respondent

SC 48/2014
BETWEEN	RAJENDRA PRASAD Applicant
AND	INDIANA PUBLICATIONS (NZ) LIMITED Respondent

Court:	McGrath, William Young and Arnold JJ
Counsel:	Applicant in Person
Judgment:	20 June 2014

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

1. This judgment deals with applications by Mr Prasad to appeal against one decision of the High Court and two decisions of the Court of Appeal.

2. First, he seeks leave to appeal against a judgment of Venning J in the High Court which upheld a judgment of an Associate Judge striking out as an abuse of process a claim by Mr Prasad seeking to re-litigate issues already determined by the courts.[1]  Venning J also directed the Registrar not to accept for filing any further purported proceedings from the applicant relating to the issues of breach of copyright or costs that had led to the applicant’s bankruptcy.

   [1]Prasad v Attorney-General [2013] NZHC 2721.

3. Mr Prasad also applies for leave to appeal against two decisions of Wild J in the Court of Appeal directing the Registrar not to accept documents that the applicant had endeavoured to file.  In both decisions, Wild J ordered that the Registrar not accept any further papers from the applicant without prior leave of a Judge.

4. The background to these matters is the applicant’s desire to challenge a District Court judgment in copyright litigation which was adverse to him, the propriety of subsequent costs orders in that proceeding, and the appellate courts’ eventual refusal to entertain the applicant’s attempts to re-litigate final judgments on these matters.  He also seeks to challenge earlier decisions of this Court refusing leave to appeal against the original judgments entered against him.[2]

   [2]Prasad v Indiana Publications (NZ) Ltd [2010] NZSC 60; and Prasad v Indiana Publications (NZ) Ltd [2012] NZSC 43.

5. None of the applications raises a question of general or public importance or other ground making it necessary in the interests of justice to hear and determine the proposed appeal.  In particular, although the outcome of the copyright and bankruptcy proceedings has been frustrating and burdensome for the applicant, there is no indication that a substantial miscarriage of justice will occur if the appeal is not heard. 

6. As well, in relation to the application against the judgment of Venning J, there are no exceptional circumstances that would justify a direct appeal to the Supreme Court.

7. Accordingly each of the applications for leave to appeal is dismissed.