Rabson

[2017] NZSC 19

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

SC MA 13/2016
[2017] NZSC 19

IN THE MATTER OF	AN APPLICATION BY MALCOLM EDWARD RABSON Applicant
Court:	Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, OʼRegan and Ellen France JJ
Counsel:	M E Rabson in person
Judgment:	2 March 2017

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for review is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

1. This is an application for review of a decision of Arnold J by minute of 19 December 2016.  In that minute, Arnold J dealt with an application by Mr Rabson for recall of this Court’s judgment in Erceg v Erceg.[1]  Arnold J noted that Mr Rabson was not a party to the Erceg v Erceg litigation, nor did he have a qualifying interest in it.  He ruled, therefore, that Mr Rabson had no standing to seek a recall of the Court’s judgment.  He also noted that the grounds on which recall was sought were misplaced.

   [1]Erceg v Erceg [2016] NZSC 135.

2. In Greer v Smith, this Court set out the approach to be taken in relation to applications for access to Court records otherwise than by parties to the proceedings.[2]  It determined that applications for access to Court records otherwise than by parties to proceedings should be directed to a Judge.  It also concluded that there was no statutory right to seek a review of a decision by a Judge determining such an application and no statutory jurisdiction to review such a decision.[3] 

   [2]Greer v Smith [2015] NZSC 196, (2015) 22 PRNZ 785.

   [3]At [11].

3. We consider that the same approach should be applied to an application for recall of a judgment by a person who is not a party to the litigation to which the judgment relates and has no potentially qualifying interest in the proceeding.  That means there is no statutory right to seek a review and no statutory jurisdiction to review in the present case . 

4. We therefore dismiss the application for review for want of jurisdiction.