Razdan Rafiq v Google New Zealand Limited

Case

[2014] NZSC 126

17 September 2014


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
SC 72/2014
[2014] NZSC 126
BETWEEN

RAZDAN RAFIQ
Applicant

AND

GOOGLE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED
Respondent

Court:

McGrath, William Young and Glazebrook JJ

Counsel:

Applicant in person
W Akel, T J Walker and B J Thomson for the Respondent

Judgment:

17 September 2014

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A        The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

B         The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 plus all reasonable           disbursements (to be fixed, if necessary, by the Registrar)   to the respondent.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

  1. Mr Rafiq applies for leave to appeal against a decision of Harrison J, dismissing his application for review of the decision of the Registrar of the Court of Appeal refusing to waive security for costs.[1]

    [1]Rafiq v Google New Zealand Limited [2014] NZCA 320.

  2. The underlying appeal to the Court of Appeal is in respect of an order for security for costs made against Mr Rafiq by Associate Judge Doogue in the High Court.[2]

    [2]Rafiq v Google New Zealand Limited [2014] NZHC 551.

  3. The High Court proceeding is a defamation claim against Google New Zealand in respect of search results returned by the Google Search Service.  Mr Rafiq claims that the search results lead to a third party website where comments are made about a Human Rights Review Tribunal decision where Mr Rafiq was a party.

  4. There was no error of principle in Harrison J’s approach and there is no risk of a miscarriage of justice.  Further, no issue of general or public importance arises.

  5. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

  6. The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 plus all reasonable disbursements (to be fixed, if necessary, by the Registrar) to the respondent.

Solicitors:
Simpson Grierson, Auckland for the Respondent


Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

1

Cases Cited

2

Statutory Material Cited

0