New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Henderson v henderson principle

Legal area

Court

26 Nov 2021

ORION MARINE LTD v SEALEGS INTERNATIONAL LTD [2021] NZHC 3207

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3207
Court

High Court

The strike out application was dismissed: Sealegs did not plainly abandon or deliberately mislead about its patent claim; procedural realities (trial timetable and patent amendment process) and legal distinctions between copyright and patent justified separate proceedings; Sealegs' patent counterclaim and patent-based defences were not so clearly untenable or oppressive as to amount to an abuse of process warranting strike out; striking out would unjustifiably limit Sealegs' right to bring and defend legitimate claims.
19 Feb 2021

OLLIVER v SPARKS [2021] NZHC 220

Citation

[2021] NZHC 220
Court

High Court

Application to strike out and/or for defendant's summary judgment dismissed. On the material before the Court it is reasonably arguable the joint venture arrangements and associated trusts could constitute nuptial settlements; the plaintiff's 2009 divestment of legal and beneficial title does not, as a matter of law at interlocutory stage, preclude s182 relief; delay was not unreasonable in context of complex related litigation and later judicial determinations; and the claim is not plainly an abuse of process on Henderson v Henderson grounds. Proceed to pleadings and timetable next steps.
26 Jun 2020

CRAIG v STRINGER [2020] NZCA 260

Citation

(2020) 25 PRNZ 367
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court's indefinite stay: there was no abuse of process, no res judicata or issue estoppel because the parties differed and issues had not been finally determined between the same parties, the Defamation Act ss 46–48 did not apply to bar the proceedings, repeated witness testimony alone does not justify staying proceedings as an abuse of process, and the appellant was entitled to pursue separate proceedings absent consolidation ordered under the Act or by the Court.
29 Mar 2012

AUCKLAND WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED V MOBIL OIL NEW ZEALAND LIMITED HC AK CIV-2011-404-2138

Citation

openlaw-4e5b55a3_96c0_4826_8b41_224653ad7ddb.pdf
Court

High Court

The strike-out application was dismissed because the meaning of the cleanup obligation is factually intertwined with issues of contamination, remediation feasibility, AWDA's plans and the reasonableness of standards at termination; these factual disputes make strike-out inappropriate and case management, pleadings amendment and further discovery are the proper course.

New Zealand Case Law

ORION MARINE LTD v SEALEGS INTERNATIONAL LTD [2021] NZHC 3207

OLLIVER v SPARKS [2021] NZHC 220

CRAIG v STRINGER [2020] NZCA 260

AUCKLAND WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED V MOBIL OIL NEW ZEALAND LIMITED HC AK CIV-2011-404-2138