New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Inspection of documents

Legal area

Court

11 Apr 2022

SOUTHERN RANGES LIMITED v COMMISSIONER OF CROWN LANDS [2022] NZHC 741 [11 April 2022]

Citation

[2022] NZHC 741
Court

High Court

The court inspected the disputed material and applied s 54 of the Evidence Act: redactions and withholdings were upheld where the document clearly recorded legal advice or requests for legal advice from qualified in-house lawyers; sharing of advice between LINZ and DOC did not amount to waiver because the Crown was treated as a single client for privilege purposes; where respondent failed to establish that disclosure of handwritten notes (WHI.034.0467) was mistaken the court declined to make a declaration preserving privilege over the entire document and found insufficient evidence to support…
15 Oct 2021

DOWNEY v QUIRK [2021] NZHC 2778

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2778
Court

High Court

The court required the defendant to file an amended affidavit of documents by 16 December 2021 that complies with r 8.15 and the Listing and Exchange Protocol, because the defendant's index of reconstructed files did not satisfy the Rules and would prejudice the plaintiffs' ability to work with the dataset; the court declined to order inspection of privileged communications about the hard drive cleaning because the defendant's affidavit set out the circumstances sufficiently and plaintiffs may pursue interrogatories or cross-examination; the court recorded and made multiple consent discovery…
14 Jul 2021

JACKSON v COLL [2021] NZHC 1768

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1768
Court

High Court

The defendants failed to establish a sufficient evidential basis for confidentiality; accordingly their claims to confidentiality were set aside, the documents ordered produced to the plaintiff within 14 days, costs awarded to the plaintiff on a 2B basis plus disbursements, and the defendants were denied indemnity from the estate for the costs of this application because their conduct in maintaining the confidentiality claim was unreasonable.
20 Jun 2019

NZ IRON SANDS HOLDINGS LTD v TOWARD INDUSTRIES LTD [2019] NZHC 1416

Citation

[2019] NZAR 1199
Court

High Court

The Court ordered discreet inspection of a 10% sample of documents (52 documents) by an Associate Judge under r 8.25 to test whether TIL's privilege claims are justified, declined to order further searches of the additional custodians under r 8.19 as speculative and disproportionate, returned unredacted mediation-related affidavit material to NZIS (which the Judge had not read), and reserved costs pending the outcome of the limited inspection.
4 Jul 2018

ABDUR RAHIM MIAH v AMP LIFE LIMITED [2018] NZHC 1634

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1634
Court

High Court

The r 9.34 inspection order was refused because authenticity of the wills and probate resealing are matters to be determined in separate Administration Act proceedings which will decide standing; inspection under r 9.34 is not necessary for proper determination of issues in this proceeding and cannot be ordered merely to test credibility, coupled with practical obstacles to producing originals from Bangladesh.
3 Jul 2018

DETECTION SERVICES LIMITED & ORS v C L PICKERING & ORS [2018] NZHC 1617

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1617
Court

High Court

All asserted confidentiality claims were set aside because the plaintiffs showed the documents are central to issues of quantum and comparability of systems, the defendants failed to demonstrate likely significant prejudice from disclosure, and Rule 8.30 protections against collateral use are adequate; accordingly non-disclosure was not necessary under the governing authorities.
8 Feb 2018

BRASHIER v BRASHIER [2018] NZHC 71

Citation

[2018] NZHC 71
Court

High Court

Defendants initially failed to comply with agreed discovery directions, causing the plaintiffs to incur extra expense; in the interests of justice the defendants should pay a contribution to those costs, fixed at $3,000.
6 Sept 2017

NEW ZEALAND DETECTOR DOG SERVICES LIMITED v WILDLIFE CONTRACTORS LIMITED [2017] NZHC 2156

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2156
Court

High Court

The court held that the plaintiffs were entitled to further discovery in respect of categories 1,2 and 5-7 subject to specified clarifications because the documents sought were relevant and discoverable; categories 3 and 4 were not ordered. The defendants must provide further affidavits clarifying possession or control and explaining non-existence and must produce the ordered documents by the specified deadline; cooperation and correspondence between counsel was encouraged rather than immediate additional hearings.
28 Aug 2017

Flujo Holdings Pty Limited v Merisant Company [2017] NZHC 2069

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2069
Court

High Court

On a realistic appraisal Flujo was the overall successful party; Flujo is awarded scale costs on a 2B basis for Merisant's applications but reduced by 30% to reflect Merisant's successful claim for a 40% contribution to actual costs in the lead up to the hearing; objections to Merisant's claimed costs for document inspection and subpoena were rejected as the time and steps were reasonably incurred.
30 Nov 2016

CYNORTIC WATER SYSTEMS LIMITED v SAUNDERS ROBINSON BROWN [2016] NZHC 2864 [30 November 2016]

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2864
Court

High Court

The Court upheld the defendant's claim of litigation privilege over document AM1431 under s56 Evidence Act 2006 and refused inspection; the other applications were resolved or fell away, and because of the mixed results and the plaintiffs' pragmatic but unaccepted proposal for counsel-only inspection, the Court ordered that costs lie where they fall.