New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Opt-out procedure

Legal area

Court

30 Mar 2021

ROSS v SOUTHERN RESPONSE EARTHQUAKE SERVICES LIMITED [2021] NZHC 684

Citation

[2021] NZHC 684
Court

High Court

CFA's application to intervene was dismissed because the court concluded CFA would not add a materially different perspective to that of the plaintiffs, CFA's interest was primarily commercial and was sufficiently protected by the funding agreement, and intervention would cause prejudice to the defendant in preparing for the scheduled hearings; by contrast leave was granted to the eight named Vickers policyholders because their participation raised legitimate interests to be heard, subject to strict timetable and limits on costs and appeal rights.
23 Feb 2021

ROSS v SOUTHERN RESPONSE EARTHQUAKE SERVICES LIMITED [2021] NZHC 2451

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2451
Court

High Court

The Court refused the directions sought; it held that while defendants may in general communicate with unrepresented class members and offer individual settlements, the Court's supervisory jurisdiction allows intervention where proposed communications risk misleading, coercive conduct, confusion during the opt-out/notice period or otherwise undermine the court's supervisory role; given the timing, scope and risk of prejudice and confusion here the directions were refused (the Court did not make a definitive ruling on the applicability of r 10.4 to unretained class members).