New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Discovery/production of documents

Legal area

Court

17 Mar 2015

CEREBOS GREGG'S LIMITED v PAULMAC LIMITED [2015] NZHC 507

Citation

[2015] NZHC 507
Court

High Court

The presumption that a discontinuing or struck out plaintiff must pay costs applies; the plaintiff did not establish a supervening event or such obvious merits as to displace that presumption; defendants' late production of documents warranted a modest reduction but did not disentitle them to costs; accordingly costs were awarded to defendants on a 2B basis reduced to a total of $6,500 (including disbursements).
18 Sept 2006

ABERNETHY AND CONNOR AS THE TRUSTEES OF THE P.M. HUNT FAMILY TRUST AND THE SAID PETER JAMES CONNOR AND PHILLIPA LOUISE ABERNETHY AS THE TRUSTEES OF THE P.M. HUNT (NO. 2) FAMILY TRUST V GRANT THORNTON AND ANOR HC WN CIV-2005-485-2636

Citation

openlaw-7146ff87_8447_4141_ade5_f05079962386.pdf
Court

High Court

The Associate Judge held that he has jurisdiction under r61A and s5(1) to hear the s85 chambers application; the Official Assignee's s85 application is properly brought in the present proceeding and need not be re-filed in the earlier bankruptcy proceeding; objections that the wrong procedure or provision was used are dismissed at this preliminary stage, while substantive questions about whether s85 is the correct vehicle for orders for production under ss68/68A are reserved for determination at the substantive hearing.
18 May 2006

MING SHAN HOLDINGS LIMITED V TAI YUAN MA AND SHUJUAN ZHANG AND ANOR HC AK CP393-IM/00

Citation

openlaw-6d617678_5fac_4298_a9a1_73f4b18d1b8d.pdf
Court

High Court

Given the prolonged delays, non‑compliance with timetabling and unpaid costs, coupled with prior judicial findings undermining the arguability of the counterclaim, the court exercised its discretion to impose an 'unless' order requiring payment of outstanding costs and additional security for costs by a fixed date and to stay further proceedings pending compliance while permitting limited applications for discovery and variation of the orders if new evidence changed the assessment of arguability.
25 Mar 2004

EDGAR ALEXANDER And Ors V GRAEME CLEGG And Anor CA CA168/02

Citation

openlaw-da6cf5dd_1f9d_4a17_a12d_a6829fbcee1e.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the whole circular was published on an occasion of qualified privilege because New Image had a duty and interest to inform its distributor network of perceived threats and to defend attacks; the appellants failed to prove malice or reckless falsity for injurious falsehood, so the injurious falsehood claim failed; accordingly the appeal is dismissed and the respondents' cross-appeal succeeds.

New Zealand Case Law

CEREBOS GREGG'S LIMITED v PAULMAC LIMITED [2015] NZHC 507

ABERNETHY AND CONNOR AS THE TRUSTEES OF THE P.M. HUNT FAMILY TRUST AND THE SAID PETER JAMES CONNOR AND PHILLIPA LOUISE ABERNETHY AS THE TRUSTEES OF THE P.M. HUNT (NO. 2) FAMILY TRUST V GRANT THORNTON AND ANOR HC WN CIV-2005-485-2636

MING SHAN HOLDINGS LIMITED V TAI YUAN MA AND SHUJUAN ZHANG AND ANOR HC AK CP393-IM/00

EDGAR ALEXANDER And Ors V GRAEME CLEGG And Anor CA CA168/02