Rabson v Chapman

Case

[2013] NZSC 65

2 July 2013


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
SC 22/2013
[2013] NZSC 65
BETWEEN

MALCOLM EDWARD RABSON
Applicant

AND

WAYNE SEYMOUR CHAPMAN
Respondent

Court:

William Young and Glazebrook JJ

Counsel:

Applicant in person
S Barker for Respondent

Judgment

2 July 2013

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

  1. Mr Rabson seeks leave to appeal against a decision of Randerson J of 11 February 2013[1] dismissing his application for review of the Registrar’s decision to dispense with security for costs in relation to an appeal against a judgment of Kos J of 10 December 2012. [2]

    [1]Rabson v Chapman [2013] NZCA 5.

    [2]Chapman v Rabson [2012] NZHC 3322.

  2. Mr Rabson also seeks leave to appeal against a minute of the Court of Appeal that it had no jurisdiction to review the judgment of Randerson J.

  3. As to the proposed appeal against Randerson J’s decision, the law in relation to security for costs is well settled and the decision of Randerson J was made in accordance with established principles.  No issue of public importance arises.  Nor do any of the matters raised by Mr Rabson point to any risk of a miscarriage of justice. [3]

    [3]Supreme Court Act 2003, s 13.

  4. With regard to the Court of Appeal minute, the power for a single judge to review the decision of the Registrar arises under s 61A(3) of the Judicature Act 1908.  The Court of Appeal’s powers under s 61A(2) to review decisions made by a single judge of that Court are expressly limited to the review of interlocutory and incidental orders made by a single judge in chambers pursuant to s 61A(1).  There is no power for the Court to review decisions made under s 61A(3).[4] 

    [4]Siemer v Stiassny [2013] NZSC 11 at [4].

  5. In any event, as noted by counsel for the respondent, Mr Rabson was adjudicated bankrupt on 18 March 2013.  We do not know the status of the particular appeal at issue in light of Mr Rabson’s bankruptcy.[5]

    [5]Lindsay Hampton and others Brookers Insolvency Law & Practice (Loose-leaf ed, Thomson Brookers) at [IN101.05] and [IN101.07]. 

  6. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

  7. Given that Mr Rabson has been adjudicated bankrupt, there is little point in making an order for costs and none is made.

Solicitors:
Buddle Finlay for Respondent


Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document

Most Recent Citation
Rabson v Chapman [2016] NZCA 45

Cases Citing This Decision

6

Siemer v Brown [2015] NZSC 102
Reekie v Attorney-General [2014] NZSC 63
Cases Cited

3

Statutory Material Cited

0

Rabson v Chapman [2013] NZCA 5
Chapman v Rabson [2012] NZHC 3322
Siemer v Stiassny [2013] NZSC 11