Rabson v Judicial Conduct Commissioner
[2017] NZSC 74
•16 May 2017
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND |
| SC 21/2017 [2017] NZSC 74 |
| BETWEEN | MALCOLM EDWARD RABSON |
| AND | JUDICIAL CONDUCT COMMISSIONER JUSTICES ELIAS, YOUNG, GLAZEBROOK, ARNOLD AND OʼREGAN |
| Court: | Elias CJ, William Young and Ellen France JJ |
Counsel: | Applicant in person |
Judgment: | 16 May 2017 |
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
____________________________________________________________________
REASONS
The applicant seeks leave to appeal from a decision of Brown J in the Court of Appeal dismissing applications (a) for review of the decision of a Deputy Registrar declining to dispense with security for costs and (b) to extend time for the filing of the application for dispensation.[1] The underlying appeal was against a minute of Williams J striking out the second respondents as parties to proceedings to judicially review a decision of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner.[2] The substantive judicial review application has since been dismissed.[3]
[1]Rabson v Judicial Conduct Commissioner [2017] NZCA 44 [Rabson (CA)].
[2]Rabson v Judicial Conduct Commissioner HC Wellington CIV-2016-485-781, 1 November 2016.
[3]Rabson v Judicial Conduct Commissioner [2016] NZHC 3162.
The background to the applications dismissed by Brown J is outlined in his judgment.[4] He saw the underlying appeal as not being reasonably arguable.[5] He was also satisfied that a reasonable and solvent litigant would not pursue the appeal.[6] In dismissing the applications, he applied well-established principles.
[4]Rabson (CA), above n 1, at [1]–[6].
[5]At [10].
[6]At [11].`
The proposed appeal does not raise any question of public or general importance and there is no appearance of a miscarriage of justice. The criteria for leave thus not being satisfied, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
Solicitors:
Meredith Connell, Wellington for First Respondent
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Second Respondents
3
2
0