PROVINCIAL FINANCE LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP) AND ANOR V BAYCORP ADVANTAGE (NZ) LIMITED AND ORS HC AK CIV 2006-404-007864

PROVINCIAL FINANCE LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP) AND ANOR V BAYCORP ADVANTAGE (NZ) LIMITED AND ORS HC AK CIV 2006-404-007864 22 February 2007IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV 2006-404-007864BETWEEN PROVINCIAL FINANCE LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP) First Plaintiff AND CONSUMER CREDIT LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP) Second Plaintiff AND BAYCORP ADVANTAGE (NZ) LIMITED First Defendant AND MARKET ROAD FINANCE LIMITED Second Defendant AND ACTIVE FINANCE LIMITED Third Defendant AND FINANCE ZONE LIMITED Fourth Defendant AND ABDUL KAREEM OSMAN Fifth Defendant AND ABUBAKR OSMAN Sixth Defendant AND MOHAMMED IMRAN OSMAN Seventh Defendant AND MOHAMMED FAROOK OSMAN Eighth Defendant AND GATE PA CARS AND COMMERCIALS LIMITED Ninth Defendant AND GOLDEN EAGLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED Tenth Defendant2 AND PREMIER HOLDINGS LIMITED Eleventh Defendant AND SHAHENSHAH INVESTMENTS LIMITED Twelfth Defendant AND APN NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Applicant Hearing: 22 February 2007 Appearances: M Arthur for Plaintiffs M Heard for 5th to 12th Defendants Ms W D Duggan for Applicant Judgment: 22 February 2007ORAL JUDGMENT OF VENNING JSolicitors: Chapman Tripp, PO Box 2206, Auckland Phillips Fox, PO Box 160, Auckland Lee Salmon Long, PO Box 2026, Shortland Street, Auckland Izard Weston, PO Box 5348, Welington 6040 Bell Gully, PO Box 4199, Auckland (W D Duggan)[1] APN New Zealand Limited seeks an order from the Court reviewing a decision of the Registrar declining them leave to search, inspect and copy the Court file or parts of the Court file in this proceeding. [2] This issue has been before the Court before on the application by another media entity. After hearing argument on that matter Harrison J on 31 January 2007 granted leave to Mr Stock, a reporter employed by the Sunday Star Times, to inspect and take a copy of the statement of claim, statement of defence and interlocutory applications filed by the defendants. The Judge imposed an embargo on the access time. [3] Matters have moved on in these proceedings since then. But there still are matters of proper concern to the plaintiffs and also to the defendants as to the extent of evidence on the file and matters contained in affidavits. However, balanced against that is of course the principle of open justice. In light of Harrison J's decision there is no principled basis on which to restrict media access to the pleadings and current interlocutory applications filed. [4] The only remaining issue is the access to interlocutory applications that may be filed in the future. I propose to deal with that by providing in this decision that they will prima facie be available for inspection but that there be an embargo of three working days after they are filed before they may be accessed by the media, to enable any party that may be concerned about the content of the interlocutory application to seek a confidentiality order from the Court.Decision[5] The decision of the Court therefore is that the application is granted to the extent that the applicant APN New Zealand Limited may have access to the pleadings on the file by inspecting and taking a copy of the statement of claim, statement of defence, and amended statements of claim and defence filed from timeto time in this proceeding. They may also have access to the interlocutory applications currently filed on the proceeding. That access does not extend to evidence filed in support of the interlocutory applications or evidence filed generally by way of affidavits. [6] The applicant may also have access to the file for the purposes of inspecting and copying any future interlocutory applications provided that such inspection and copying shall not occur for a period of three days after any particular interlocutory application is filed. [7] Although this application has been made by APN New Zealand Limited and the orders are made formally in its favour I indicate that it is the intention of the Court that access on the similar terms be made available to all representatives of any accredited media in the future so that there should be no further need for formal applications to be made through the Registrar in relation to searching the file. [8] In addition to access to the interlocutory application the applicant and other media may have access to the fifth to 12 th defendants request for further particulars. [9] The media may of course have access to both this minute and Harrison J's minutes. __________________________ Venning J