KOREA DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION v HUH [2020] NZHC 2589

KOREA DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION v HUH [2020] NZHC 2589 [2 October 2020]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDAUCKLAND REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROATĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHECIV 2014-404-003372[2020] NZHC 2589BETWEEN KOREA DEPOSIT INSURANCECORPORATION, TRUSTEE INBANKRUPTCY FOR JEIL SAVINGSBANK, JINHEUNG SAVINGS BANK andYOUNGNAM SAVINGS BANKPlaintiffsAND JAE HO HUHDefendantHearing: On the papersCounsel: G J Thwaite for the PlaintiffsT B Fitzgerald for the DefendantS McNulty for Yoonwoo C & C Development Corp (requestingaccess to Court documents)Judgment: 2 October 2020JUDGMENT OF CAMPBELL J[Request for Access to Court Documents]This judgment was delivered by me on 2 October 2020 at 12pmpursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court RulesRegistrar/Deputy RegistrarSolicitors/Counsel:G J Thwaite, AucklandKenton Chambers Lawyers, AucklandBell Gully, AucklandJackson Russell Solicitors, AucklandIntroduction[1] A non-party, Yoonwoo C & C Development Corp (Yoonwoo), has requestedaccess to the Court file in this proceeding. The request was made by memorandumdated 9 September 2020, filed in a proceeding brought by Yoonwoo against a Mr Huh,who is also the defendant in this proceeding.[2] Yoonwoo's request is made under the Senior Courts (Access to CourtDocuments) Rules 2017 (the Rules). As required by r 11(3), the Registrar gave a copyof the request to the parties to this proceeding. Counsel for the defendant has filed acomprehensive memorandum opposing the request, except to the extent that Yoonwoohas a right to access the formal court record under r 8. Counsel for the plaintiff hasfiled a very brief memorandum opposing the request to the same extent.[3] The request and the memoranda were referred to me earlier this week, as DutyJudge.[4] Yoonwoo requests access to "the Court file" in this proceeding (including anyenforcement or examination proceeding). Yoonwoo makes the request pursuant to theRules, but does not identify the particular rules on which it relies.[5] I refuse the request. In summary, this is because the Rules require a personrequesting access to ask for particular documents. Instead, Yoonwoo has requestedaccess to the "the Court file". The Rules do not permit a request in such broadlyexpressed terms.[6] The starting point, in relation to a civil proceeding, is the general right of accessof the public under r 8(1). This grants every person the right to access the "formalcourt record" relating to a civil proceeding. The formal court record is defined in r 4.It includes "a register or an index" (as well as, among other things, judgments, orders,and minutes). The "register or index" is a reference to the "Register of documentsfiled" that the Court keeps for each civil proceeding.11 Fuji Xerox New Zealand Limited v Whittaker [2018] NZHC 1043 at [11].[7] By r 10(1), a person exercises the general right of access under r 8 by askingthe Registrar "for access to 1 or more documents". It is clear from this rule that aperson requesting access has to identify the documents requested.[8] Rule 8(1) does not confer a right on a person to access "the Court file", assought by Yoonwoo.2 Yoonwoo may, under r 8(1), access the formal court record. Itstill has that right. But to exercise that right, it should ask the Registrar under r 10(1)for particular documents. If Yoonwoo does not already know the details of thedocuments that it seeks, it can obtain those details by first accessing the "Register ofdocuments filed". It can then identify any other documents to which it has a generalright of access under r 8(1), and request access to them under r 10(1).[9] If someone wishes to access a document to which they do not have a generalright of access under r 8, they may request access under r 11. The request must be inwriting and must set out "sufficient particulars of the document to enable the Registrarto identify it" (r 11(2)(b)). Yoonwoo's request does not do this. It is a blanket requestfor access to "the Court file". Rule 11 does not permit such a broadly expressedrequest.[10] Although I refuse the request, Yoonwoo remains free to exercise its generalright of access to the formal court record (which does not require a written request)and to make a new (but compliant) request under r 11.[11] Finally, I record that Yoonwoo suggested that its request be put beforeAssociate Judge Bell, who Yoonwoo said is familiar with both this proceeding and theproceeding in which Yoonwoo is the plaintiff. I did not do that. To the extent that therequest depended on r 11, an Associate Judge does not have jurisdiction: r 11 (7).______________________Campbell J2 Compare r 8(2), which does allow access to the "Court file" in administration matters.