WAITAKERE GROUP LTD v JAMES HARDIE NEW ZEALAND LTD [2021] NZHC 1403

WAITAKERE GROUP LTD v JAMES HARDIE NEW ZEALAND LTD [2021] NZHC 1403

The court found the interrogatories are relevant to a central issue but presently overbroad and imprecise such that they risk eliciting narrative evidence and contestable assertions of responsibility; final determination on leave was adjourned pending filing of the defendants' amended statement of defence and forthcoming evidence in the White proceedings, with any revised interrogatories required to be precise.

Citation
[2021] NZHC 1403
Parties
First Plaintiff: Waitakere Group Limited; Second Plaintiff: Metlifecare Pinesong Limited; Third Plaintiff: Forest Lake Gardens Limited; Fourth Plaintiff: Vision (Dannemora) Limited; Fifth Plaintiff: Metlifecare Coastal Villas Limited; First Defendant: James Hardie New Zealand Limited; Second Defendant: Studorp Limited; Third Defendant: James Hardie NZ Holdings Limited; Fourth Defendant: RCI Holdings Pty Limited; Fifth Defendant: James Hardie Australia Pty Limited; Sixth Defendant: James Hardie Research Pty Limited; Seventh Defendant: James Hardie Industries PLC
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
15 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceeding Interlocutory Application Concerning Discovery/interrogatories in Product Liability/weathertightness Litigation / Application for Leave to Amend Interrogatories (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application adjourned. Final consideration of leave to amend Interrogatories 247-251 deferred pending defendants' amended statement of defence and provision of White evidence; current draft is impermissibly broad and must be revised to be precise.
Legal Topics
Interrogatories, Leave to Interrogate a Second Time, Relevance and Burden, Primary Facts, Pleadings
Civil Procedure Discovery Evidence Product Liability Interrogatories Leave to Interrogate a Second Time Relevance and Burden Primary Facts +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Waitakere Group Limited

First Plaintiff

Metlifecare Pinesong Limited

Second Plaintiff

Forest Lake Gardens Limited

Third Plaintiff

Vision (Dannemora) Limited

Fourth Plaintiff

Metlifecare Coastal Villas Limited

Fifth Plaintiff

James Hardie New Zealand Limited

First Defendant

Studorp Limited

Second Defendant

James Hardie NZ Holdings Limited

Third Defendant

RCI Holdings Pty Limited

Fourth Defendant

James Hardie Australia Pty Limited

Fifth Defendant

James Hardie Research Pty Limited

Sixth Defendant

James Hardie Industries PLC

Seventh Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Proceeding Interlocutory Application Concerning Discovery/interrogatories in Product Liability/weathertightness Litigation / Application for Leave to Amend Interrogatories (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to amend Interrogatories 247-251
  2. 2 Whether the proposed interrogatories are impermissibly broad and imprecise
  3. 3 Whether the interrogatories impose undue burden given their temporal scope

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the interrogatories are relevant to a central issue but presently overbroad and imprecise such that they risk eliciting narrative evidence and contestable assertions of responsibility; final determination on leave was adjourned pending filing of the defendants' amended statement of defence and forthcoming evidence in the White proceedings, with any revised interrogatories required to be precise.

Court Disposition

Application adjourned. Final consideration of leave to amend Interrogatories 247-251 deferred pending defendants' amended statement of defence and provision of White evidence; current draft is impermissibly broad and must be revised to be precise.

Orders

  • Final consideration of leave to amend Interrogatories 247-251 is adjourned pending the filing of the defendants' amended statement of defence and provision of the White evidence
  • Parties may revert to the judge to agree or seek timetabling directions if necessary