New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Arbitration stay

Legal area

Court

22 Feb 2019

COLEBROOK v OKARAHIA DOWNS LIMITED [2019] NZHC 241 .

Citation

[2019] NZHC 241
Court

High Court

The Court concluded the plaintiff is a creditor entitled to pursue enforcement because the Agreement's express no set-off clause barred the defendant from withholding the Sharemilker's agreed percentage of Milk Payments and from asserting set-off to defeat the statutory demand; the arbitration/dispute resolution regime did not prevent the applicant using statutory demand/liquidation where the contract expressly forbids set-off; however the interest claim fell outside the no set-off clause and was at least arguably a penalty giving rise to a genuine dispute; s 310 set-off does not retrospectiv…
26 May 2017

SAVVY VINEYARDS 4334 LIMITED v WETA ESTATE LIMITED [2017] NZHC 1111

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1111
Court

High Court

The Court applied a prima facie test and found that clause 25.7 constituted an arbitration agreement that remained prima facie operative because the procedural cancellation route in clause 25 was not followed; accordingly the Court stayed the fourth and fifth causes of action and referred those disputes to arbitration, ordered the plaintiffs to provide security for costs of NZD 12,800 as a first tranche within 10 working days, stayed the proceeding pending provision of that security, and dismissed the defendants' strike out application.
11 Dec 2015

FLOCK HILL HOLDINGS v UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY [2015] NZHC 3169

Citation

[2015] NZHC 3169
Court

High Court

The arbitration clauses in the leases are operative and enforceable; Parliament intended Part 1A of the CPLA to provide a statutory framework but not to preclude parties contracting to an alternative dispute resolution procedure; there is a real dispute to be arbitrated, so under Arbitration Act sch 1 art 8(1) the High Court must stay the proceedings and refer the rent determinations to arbitration.
12 Jul 2013

THE LAW CONNECTION LIMITED v J ROCHE and W DOUGLAS [2013] NZHC 1742

Citation

[2013] NZHC 1742
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was refused because material factual disputes and contested causation and contractual interpretation made it unsafe to decide liability without full evidence and testing; however the 2010 arbitration clause is an operative dispute resolution agreement and the defendants' request for a stay was timely, so the proceeding is stayed and referred to arbitration on specified conditions (notice by plaintiff, attempt to resolve within specified time, arbitration if unresolved), with leave to apply to lift the stay if the process is not properly followed.
16 Oct 2007

OLIPHANT & ANOR V N J G HOLDINGS LTD HC AK CIV 2007-404-002856

Citation

openlaw-725f570f_cf99_4942_bad2_f14204c5939c.pdf
Court

High Court

Statutory demand was validly served and not complied with, creating a presumption of insolvency; the defendant's asserted disputes and arbitration did not constitute a genuine and substantial dispute capable of defeating the winding up application because key issues (possession/forfeiture and quantification of counterclaims) were already resolved against the defendant and there was no material showing any counterclaim exceeded the demand; accordingly appointment of a liquidator was appropriate.

New Zealand Case Law

COLEBROOK v OKARAHIA DOWNS LIMITED [2019] NZHC 241 .

SAVVY VINEYARDS 4334 LIMITED v WETA ESTATE LIMITED [2017] NZHC 1111

FLOCK HILL HOLDINGS v UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY [2015] NZHC 3169

THE LAW CONNECTION LIMITED v J ROCHE and W DOUGLAS [2013] NZHC 1742

OLIPHANT & ANOR V N J G HOLDINGS LTD HC AK CIV 2007-404-002856