Rafiq v Commissioner of New Zealand Police

Mr Rafiq sought leave to bring an action against the Commissioner of Police, alleging defamation in various instances dating back to 2007 and seeking substantial compensatory, aggravated, and exemplary damages. Mr Rafiq had been declared a vexatious litigant under the now repealed section 88B of the Judicature Act 1908, requiring him to obtain leave from the court to file any proceeding. The court considered whether Mr Rafiq had established a prima facie ground for the proceeding and if it was not an abuse of the process of the court. The court concluded that Mr Rafiq had not satisfied the requirement of having a prima facie ground for the proceeding, as he had not substantiated his allegations or addressed the limitation periods for defamation actions. Furthermore, the court found that the application was not serious and would constitute an abuse of the process of the court. The application for leave was dismissed.

The legal issues in this case revolved around Mr Rafiq's status as a vexatious litigant and the criteria for granting leave to file a proceeding under section 88B(2) of the repealed Judicature Act and the new provisions in the Senior Courts Act 2016. The court had to determine whether Mr Rafiq had established a prima facie case for defamation and whether the proceeding was an abuse of the court process. The court also considered the transitional arrangements for individuals declared vexatious litigants under the repealed section 88B and the implications of the new provisions in the Senior Courts Act.

The court found that Mr Rafiq had not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate his allegations of defamation or to address the limitation periods applicable to defamation actions. The court concluded that Mr Rafiq had not satisfied the criteria for a prima facie case and that the proceeding would be an abuse of the court process, given Mr Rafiq's history and the nature of the claim. The court dismissed the application for leave to file the proceeding, finding it to be totally without merit under the new provisions of the Senior Courts Act.

The final orders of the court were that the application for leave to file the proceeding was dismissed. Mr Rafiq was not granted permission to bring the defamation action against the Commissioner of Police.