DELEGAT & ANOR v NORMAN & ANOR [2013] NZHC 3485

DELEGAT & ANOR v NORMAN & ANOR [2013] NZHC 3485

Even accepting all allegations about counsel's dealings with the third party and witnesses, the plaintiffs failed to meet the high threshold for recall because the alleged conduct would not have altered the Court's central findings: the defendant was accepted as credible based on his evidence and documentation, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] NZHC 3485
Parties
First Plaintiff: JAKOV NIKOLA DELEGAT aka JIM DELEGAT as trustee of the Jim Delegat Business Trust; Second Plaintiff: BOAT 93 HOLDINGS LIMITED (In liquidation); Defendant: CHRISTOPER JOHN NORMAN; Third Party: JULIE ANNE SALTHOUSE
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
17 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Application to Recall Judgment / Post Judgment Recall Application Following Final Judgment of 4 December 2012
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Recall of Judgment, Shadow Director and De Facto Director, Witness Dealings and Alleged Coaching, Fraud and Perjury, Costs
Company Law Civil Procedure Evidence Legal Ethics and Professional Conduct Recall of Judgment Shadow Director and De Facto Director Witness Dealings and Alleged Coaching Fraud and Perjury +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JAKOV NIKOLA DELEGAT aka JIM DELEGAT as trustee of the Jim Delegat Business Trust

First Plaintiff

BOAT 93 HOLDINGS LIMITED (In liquidation)

Second Plaintiff

CHRISTOPER JOHN NORMAN

Defendant

JULIE ANNE SALTHOUSE

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Application to Recall Judgment / Post Judgment Recall Application Following Final Judgment of 4 December 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judgment should be recalled on grounds of fraud, perjury or other very special reasons
  2. 2 Whether counsel for the defendant's dealings with the third party and witnesses constituted improper witness coaching or collusion that would have affected the outcome
  3. 3 Whether newly disclosed material met the Shannon threshold for recall of judgment

Ratio Decidendi

Even accepting all allegations about counsel's dealings with the third party and witnesses, the plaintiffs failed to meet the high threshold for recall because the alleged conduct would not have altered the Court's central findings: the defendant was accepted as credible based on his evidence and documentation, the plaintiffs lacked pleaded facts and evidential support to establish shadow or de facto directorship or dishonest conduct, and the newly disclosed matters were not sufficiently material under Shannon to affect the outcome.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for recall of judgment and rehearing dismissed
  • Costs to follow the event; if counsel cannot agree memoranda to be received by the Court