STAFFORD v REGISTRAR-GENERAL OF LAND [2017] NZHC 3253

STAFFORD v REGISTRAR-GENERAL OF LAND [2017] NZHC 3253 [19 December 2017]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDWELLINGTON REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROATE WHANGANUI-Ā-TARA ROHECIV-2017-485-1033[2017] NZHC 3253UNDER the Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016 andPart 30 of the High Court RulesIN THE MATTER OF an application for judicial review of adecision by the Registrar-General of Landpursuant to s 216 of the Land Transfer Act1952BETWEEN RORE PAT STAFFORDApplicantAND REGISTRAR-GENERAL OF LANDFirst RespondentAND ACCIDENT COMPENSATIONCORPORATIONSecond RespondentHearing: 19 December 2017Appearances: K Feint and M Smith for ApplicantM Bryant for First RespondentR Roff for Second RespondentOral Judgment: 19 December 2017ORAL INTERIM JUDGMENT CHURCHMAN J[1] This case involves an application for judicial review, and a related applicationfor urgent interim orders. The proceedings are dated 18 September 2017 and werefiled and served yesterday afternoon.[2] A teleconference was held this morning, 19 December, at which Ms Roffappeared for the ACC, the second respondent, and Mr Bryant for the Register-Generalof Land, the first respondent, with Ms Feint and Mr Smith for the applicant.[3] As a result of that teleconference this matter was set down for hearing of theinterim application this afternoon.[4] During the intervening period the parties have discussed the possibility ofundertakings. That process has continued during the course of this hearing thisafternoon and the need for an interim hearing has been avoided on the basis ofundertakings being provided by both the first and second respondent.[5] In relation to the undertaking provided by ACC, I record it as follows:ACC confirms that, prior to 31 January 2018, it will not deal with or take anysteps in relation to the property which may adversely affect the applicant'sclaimed interest in the property. ACC undertake that if the purchaser of theproperty seeks to invoke cl 18.1 of the Agreement for Sale and Purchase it willimmediately notify the applicant.[6] For the sake of clarity I confirm that the property to which this undertakingrelates is those parcels of land referred to and identified in the statement of claim inthis matter and constituting an area of land colloquially known as Morrison Square,Nelson.[7] In addition to the undertaking, the issue of discovery has also been addressedand by consent I make the discovery in terms of a memorandum filed this afternoon.The discovery in respect of the first respondent is as set out in that memorandum.[8] In relation to the second respondent, ACC has provided as part of an affidavitpresently unsworn but exchanged, a copy of the Agreement for Sale and Purchase inrespect of the property in question.[9] A further issue arose in relation to the need for discovery regardingcommunication between ACC and others in relation to knowledge of these possibleproceedings. I have declined to make an order in respect of particular discovery inrelation to this information and I have done that on the basis of an indication that thedraft affidavit exchanged contains information which may resolve the concerns thatthe applicant has, to the effect that there may have been a communication with thirdparties by the second respondent.[10] However, if having reviewed that affidavit when it is formally sworn andreceived, the applicant believes further specific discovery against the secondrespondent, limited to this issue of communication with third parties aroundknowledge of these proceedings, is necessary then I reserve leave to the applicant tomake an urgent application to the Court.[11] This matter has been allocated a hearing date to start at 11am on the 29th ofJanuary 2018. Discovery will need to be complied with sufficiently prior to that dateso that the information can be analysed. I therefore direct that discovery be completedseven working days prior to the hearing.[12] This matter is accordingly adjourned on that basis and in accordance with theminute issued this morning following the teleconference. In relation to the filing ofstatements of defence and supporting documentation it is noted that other parties, inparticular the Attorney-General may wish to participate in the hearing to take place onthe 29th of January. If that is the case then leave is likely to be granted, given the lackof opposition, and the Attorney-General should promptly take steps to ensure that anyapplication for leave to intervene is filed promptly.[13] For the sake of completeness, I confirm that a memorandum of counsel for aninterested third party was filed immediately prior to the commencement of this hearingthis afternoon. The memorandum was on behalf of the purchaser of the property. It ispossible that this third party may also wish to join these proceeding. I reserve leavefor them to do so and direct that a copy of this interim order be served on them andalso indicate, should they wish to participate in the hearing scheduled for 29 January,that they promptly file an application for leave to appear as a third party and whateveraffidavit information they wish to tender for the hearing.[14] I take this opportunity to thank counsel for their assistance in addressing this_____________________________Churchman JSolicitors:Sian Holden Pitt & Moore, Nelson for Applicant