Body Corporate 199883 v Auckland Council [2017] NZHC 2042

Body Corporate 199883 v Auckland Council [2017] NZHC 2042

The Court declined to strike out the proceedings as a nullity but held the plaintiffs must file a further amended statement of claim within 20 working days providing more detailed particulars for each alleged defect: (a) whether the defect arose from design, construction, mechanical issue or materials during the remedial works; (b) which specific Council duty (consent, inspection, certification) is alleged to have been breached in respect of each defect; (c) particulars and location of any insufficiency in consented plans/specifications relied on; and (d) more precise locations (diagrams permitted). The Court ordered an experts' meeting within 10 working days after filing the further...

Citation
[2017] NZHC 2042
Parties
First Plaintiff: Body Corporate 199883; Second Plaintiffs: Unit owners (Ridgeview Apartments); First Defendant: Auckland Council; Second Defendants: BC2004 Limited and BC2009 Limited; Third Defendant (discontinued): Gavin Smith
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
24 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Leaky Building Negligence Claim (defective Remedial Works) / Interlocutory Strike Out / Particulars Application
Outcome
Proceedings not struck out; plaintiffs ordered to provide further particulars and amend statement of claim; experts to meet; privileged correspondence protected
Legal Topics
Particularisation of Pleadings, Strike Out / Abuse of Process, Without Prejudice Privilege, Duty of Care, Limitation
Building Law Negligence Civil Procedure Evidence Law Particularisation of Pleadings Strike Out / Abuse of Process Without Prejudice Privilege Duty of Care +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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Body Corporate 199883

First Plaintiff

Unit owners (Ridgeview Apartments)

Second Plaintiffs

Auckland Council

First Defendant

BC2004 Limited and BC2009 Limited

Second Defendants

Gavin Smith

Third Defendant (discontinued)

Procedural Posture

Leaky Building Negligence Claim (defective Remedial Works) / Interlocutory Strike Out / Particulars Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs' pleadings sufficiently particularise alleged defects and the Council's breach of duty to allow a fair defence
  2. 2 Whether the statement of claim should be struck out as an abuse or nullity for lack of particulars
  3. 3 What further particulars are reasonably required in a third‑wave leaky building negligence claim

Ratio Decidendi

The Court declined to strike out the proceedings as a nullity but held the plaintiffs must file a further amended statement of claim within 20 working days providing more detailed particulars for each alleged defect: (a) whether the defect arose from design, construction, mechanical issue or materials during the remedial works; (b) which specific Council duty (consent, inspection, certification) is alleged to have been breached in respect of each defect; (c) particulars and location of any insufficiency in consented plans/specifications relied on; and (d) more precise locations (diagrams permitted). The Court ordered an experts' meeting within 10 working days after filing the further...

Court Disposition

Proceedings not struck out; plaintiffs ordered to provide further particulars and amend statement of claim; experts to meet; privileged correspondence protected

Orders

  • Council to file memorandum on costs within 15 working days and plaintiffs' memorandum within a further 5 working days; costs otherwise reserved