New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Crown vicarious liability

Legal area

Court

10 Nov 2017

HUNTER v ATTORNEY-GENERAL SUED ON BEHALF OF THE NEW ZEALAND POLICE AND THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE [2017] NZHC 2767

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2767
Court

High Court

The Attorney-General on behalf of the New Zealand Police is the correct defendant for the police conduct; the Attorney-General on behalf of the Ministry of Justice is not an appropriate defendant and is removed; the JP enjoys statutory immunity unless conduct exceeded or was without jurisdiction (a threshold requiring gross negligence or bad faith) and the current pleadings do not meet that threshold so the JP must be joined personally and pleadings amended if the plaintiff intends to pursue that claim; absent joinder of the JP the matter is within District Court jurisdiction and will be tran…
5 Aug 2011

CHESTERFIELDS PRESCHOOLS LIMITED V THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE HC CHCH CIV 2008-409-000995

Citation

openlaw-46779615_4483_4a14_a39a_b8e4a60fa543.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court struck out the sixth cause of action because the allegations concerning discovery and affidavit conduct were barred by immunity from suit for conduct in judicial proceedings; the seventh cause under s27 NZBORA was struck out because the pleaded conduct involved discretionary administrative action not an adjudicative tribunal function; the first five misfeasance causes were not struck out because, on the pleadings and existing authorities, direct or arguable vicarious liability of the Commissioner and the public‑office status of Mr Shamy remained tenable and required trial or fuller…
19 Aug 2010

GRAHAM ASHLEY ROBERT PALMER V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF NEW ZEALAND HC AK CIV-2009-404-6602

Citation

openlaw-1ab82cee_79b4_46ad_b713_f40c0174ca5d.pdf
Court

High Court

Warrants obtained by a non-sworn forensic accountant were valid because s198 does not restrict applicants to sworn officers; any minor defect in description (east vs west wing) was an error of form cured by s204 absent miscarriage of justice; warrants were lawfully executed; police acting pursuant to process are protected by s39 absent malice or bad faith; the Crown is not vicariously liable under s6(5) for execution of judicial process in the absence of bad faith; accordingly causes of action based on invalidity/unlawful execution could not succeed and were properly struck out.

New Zealand Case Law

HUNTER v ATTORNEY-GENERAL SUED ON BEHALF OF THE NEW ZEALAND POLICE AND THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE [2017] NZHC 2767

CHESTERFIELDS PRESCHOOLS LIMITED V THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE HC CHCH CIV 2008-409-000995

GRAHAM ASHLEY ROBERT PALMER V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF NEW ZEALAND HC AK CIV-2009-404-6602