LAWRENCE V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND HC AK CIV 2008-404-20

LAWRENCE V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND HC AK CIV 2008-404-20

Application dismissed because applicant failed to satisfy the Welgas requirements for r301 relief: there is no probable viable claim, no basis to believe the specific documents are or were in BNZ's control, and additional fatal bars exist including bankruptcy vesting of causes of action in the Official Assignee (who...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-b4c0508e_2c14_44cd_8fb3_6846c9732216.pdf
Parties
Intending Plaintiff: Garry Raymond Lawrence; Intending Defendant: Bank of New Zealand
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
25 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Pre Commencement Discovery Application Under R301 High Court Rules / Interlocutory Application (hearing and Judgment)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Pre Commencement Discovery, Rule 301 High Court Rules, Bankruptcy Vesting, Issue Estoppel, Limitation Period, Allegations of Perjury, Costs
Civil Procedure Insolvency Banking Law Evidence Limitation Law Pre Commencement Discovery Rule 301 High Court Rules Bankruptcy Vesting +4 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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Garry Raymond Lawrence

Intending Plaintiff

Bank of New Zealand

Intending Defendant

Procedural Posture

Pre Commencement Discovery Application Under R301 High Court Rules / Interlocutory Application (hearing and Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the three Welgas requirements for an order under r301 are satisfied
  2. 2 Whether the documents sought are or were in BNZ's control
  3. 3 Whether the intending plaintiff has a viable cause of action given bankruptcy vesting under Insolvency Act s42

Ratio Decidendi

Application dismissed because applicant failed to satisfy the Welgas requirements for r301 relief: there is no probable viable claim, no basis to believe the specific documents are or were in BNZ's control, and additional fatal bars exist including bankruptcy vesting of causes of action in the Official Assignee (who does not consent), prior final determinations amounting to issue estoppel, and limitation; allegations of perjury do not provide civil grounds for discovery.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Registrar directed to endorse this judgment with delivery time 10.00 a.m. on 25 July 2008
  • Application for pre-commencement discovery dismissed