TUV v CHIEF OF NEW ZEALAND DEFENCE FORCE [2020] NZSC 47
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and framed the determinative legal question as whether the O'Connor v Hart incapacity test applies to employment‑jurisdiction settlement agreements certified under s149 ERA 2000 and, if not, what test should apply and whether the certified settlement should be set aside for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] NZSC 47
- Parties
- Applicant: TUV; Respondent: Chief of New Zealand Defence Force
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 15 May 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal to Supreme Court / Leave to Appeal Granted
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted
- Legal Topics
- Mental Incapacity, Settlement Agreement, Certification Under S149 Employment Relations Act 2000, O'connor V Hart Test, Voidable Contract
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
TUV
Applicant
Chief of New Zealand Defence Force
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal to Supreme Court / Leave to Appeal Granted
Legal Issues
- 1 Does the O'Connor v Hart test (that a contract is not voidable for mental incapacity unless the other party had actual or constructive knowledge or equitable fraud is established) apply in the employment jurisdiction, specifically to a settlement agreement certified under s149 ERA 2000?
- 2 If O'Connor does not apply, what is the relevant test and should the certified settlement agreement be set aside for mental incapacity in this case?
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and framed the determinative legal question as whether the O'Connor v Hart incapacity test applies to employment‑jurisdiction settlement agreements certified under s149 ERA 2000 and, if not, what test should apply and whether the certified settlement should be set aside for mental incapacity.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted
- Approved ground of appeal recorded as articulated by the Court
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
TUV v CHIEF OF NEW ZEALAND DEFENCE FORCE [2020] NZSC 47 [15 May 2020]NOTE: EMPLOYMENT COURT ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATIONOF NAME AND IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OFAPPLICANT REMAINS IN FORCE.NOTE: ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE TERMS OF THESETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE APPEALREMAINS IN FORCE.IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDI TE KŌTI MANA NUISC 14/2020[2020] NZSC 47BETWEEN TUVApplicantAND CHIEF OF NEW ZEALAND DEFENCEFORCERespondentCourt: Glazebrook, O'Regan and Ellen France JJCounsel: A J Douglass and A S Butler for ApplicantJ C Catran and J P A Boyle for RespondentJudgment: 15 May 2020JUDGMENT OF THE COURTA Leave to appeal is granted (TUV v Chief of New ZealandDefence Force [2020] NZCA 12).B The approved ground is:(i) Does the test in O'Connor v Hart [1985] 1 NZLR159 (PC) (that a contract is not voidable for mentalincapacity unless the other contracting party hasactual or constructive knowledge of the incapacity, orequitable fraud is established) apply in theemployment jurisdiction (in particular, to asettlement agreement that has been certified unders 149 of the Employment Relations Act 2000)?(ii) If not, what is the relevant test and should thesettlement agreement have been set aside in this caseon the grounds of mental incapacity?____________________________________________________________________Solicitors:McCarthy Law Ltd, Blenheim for ApplicantCrown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent