New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Enforcement of judgment

Legal area

Court

7 Dec 2023

BODY CORPORATE 203344 v SHUE [2023] NZHC 3567

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3567
Court

High Court

The Court lacks jurisdiction to make the representation order sought under r 18.7 HCR to appoint the defendant as personal representative of the deceased's estate because the High Court Rules contain no express provision permitting such a limited grant of administration for litigation; estate representation must be dealt with within the probate jurisdiction with its safeguards and cannot be imposed in the absence of consent, therefore the application is declined and the proceeding is stayed.
25 May 2023

LUNN v LEE [2023] NZHC 1275

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1275
Court

High Court

Given the prior judgment, service on the respondent, the condition of the property and the respondent's failure to take steps, the Court exercised its discretion under r 13.9 and r 17.81 to grant a possession order, authorised issuance of a writ of possession, but ordered the writ to lie in Court unexecuted for two weeks to permit the respondent an opportunity to vacate; costs and expenses of enforcement to be paid by the respondent on a 2B basis and the applicant to indemnify the Court for costs of taking possession.
9 Mar 2023

DENNIS v GOODE [2023] NZHC 445

Citation

[2023] NZHC 445
Court

High Court

The court was satisfied reasonable attempts at personal service had been made and that the specified methods (affixing to the gate, placing in the letterbox, emailing and texting) were likely to bring the bankruptcy notice to the judgment debtor's attention; accordingly substituted service was ordered and service was to be treated as effective three working days after completion of those steps.
16 Dec 2022

KIM & Anor v MAO [2022] NZHC 3500

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3500
Court

High Court

The Guarantee and Loan Agreement unambiguously entitled the lenders to solicitor-and-own-client costs for obtaining or attempting to obtain payment after an Event of Default; the debtor was liable under the District Court judgment and his interlocutory applications impeded enforcement and were without reasonable prospect of success; the costs claimed related to steps covered by the contractual indemnity, were reasonably necessary and charged at reasonable market rates, therefore indemnity costs were awarded in the specified amounts.
8 Nov 2022

WU v CHRISTCHURCH HIGH COURT [2022] NZHC 2916

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2916
Court

High Court

The proceeding was struck out as an abuse of process because the claims had been finally determined in consolidated proceedings (so collateral attack was impermissible), Mr Wu had no standing to resurrect or re-litigate Ms Fan's claims, and the sale of the property occurred pursuant to judicial sale directions (not under pt 17 enforcement requiring r17.72 notice), rendering the application meritless and plainly abusive.
20 Oct 2022

POWERNET LIMITED v THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES [2022] NZHC 2736

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2736
Court

High Court

Applied Intelligence Ltd was restored because restoration was necessary to enforce PowerNet’s judgment, the Registrar consented, the Treasury had no objection, relevant parties did not oppose, and the company was unable to pay the debt; accordingly immediate liquidation and appointment of a qualified liquidator with approved fees was appropriate.
18 Oct 2022

BANORA v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2022] NZHC 2691

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2691
Court

High Court

Leave to extend time was refused because the delay was extreme and deliberate, applicants had legal representation and reached an agreement demonstrating they considered litigation final, permitting the appeal would cause real prejudice to the Council (reopening settled costs, delaying enforcement of the $106,950 counterclaim and undermining finality), and the length of delay and prejudice overwhelmed any need to assess merits.
5 Aug 2022

STALIX PROPERTY LIMITED v WU [2022] NZHC 1928

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1928
Court

High Court

The plaintiffs, as registered proprietors following a lawful sale conducted by the Registrar pursuant to final and enforceable court orders and after all appeal rights were exhausted, are entitled to immediate possession; the defendants raised only arguments previously rejected by the Court and offered no arguable defence, so summary judgment for recovery of land was granted and defendants ordered to vacate within 48 hours of service.
17 Jan 2022

LAWTON v REDEMPTECH HOLDINGS PTE LIMITED [2022] NZHC 21

Citation

[2022] NZHC 21
Court

High Court

Application dismissed because: (1) RESP loan principal was not payable (repayment contingent on PLG funding) and interest was not due or accruing absent a demand, so interest could not be charged; (2) RTL had earlier validly demanded repayment of USD34m creating a present right of set-off that extinguished or took priority over any receivables or monthly income payable to RHL, preventing effective charging; (3) the security registration relied on concerned RTL's interest not RHL's and did not constitute a breach attracting directors' personal liability; and (4) directors' alleged loan indebte…
7 Dec 2021

DOVEY AVIATION CONSULTING LIMITED v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF NEW ZEALAND [2021] NZHC 3340

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3340
Court

High Court

Court granted a stay of execution of the substantive judgment only because the plaintiff's current asset position was unknown and there was real risk it could not repay the judgment if the appeal succeeded; that risk was mitigated by defendants' agreed joint and several indemnity for any increase in repair costs. The court refused to stay the costs judgment because successful parties are ordinarily entitled to interim payment of fixed costs, the risk of non-repayment of costs was lower, and stakeholder holding was unnecessary.