New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Peruvian guano relevance test

Legal area

Court

6 Nov 2012

BAY CITIES REAL ESTATE LIMITED V RE/MAX NEW ZEALAND LIMITED HC NAP CIV-2010-441-134

Citation

openlaw-fac80e00_25d3_45b2_be8b_f32b380d92e1.pdf
Court

High Court

Application for further and better/particular discovery granted. Documents relating to the franchise sales presentations to the plaintiff (items 1 and 5) are clearly relevant and must be discovered. Documents relating to presentations to other franchisees and disputes (items 2,3,4,6) are also discoverable following a proportionality/balancing assessment; defendant ordered to file an affidavit under r 8.19 stating whether such documents are or were in its control and, if not, when control ceased and who now has control, to make documents available for inspection, and to undertake reasonable se…
26 Nov 2007

HMI TECHNOLOGIES LTD V SIGNOPSYS ELECTRONIC SIGNS LTD HC AK CIV-2007-404-006229

Citation

openlaw-bd834e48_cf58_47df_9d9a_4601eefb1b99.pdf
Court

High Court

The appeal was allowed in part because the District Court's staggered discovery timetable and related statements effectively required HMI to produce commercially sensitive tender documents first and precluded HMI's entitlement to claim commercial confidentiality; discovery scope must be determined by the Peruvian Guano relevance test and confidentiality claims resolved through the established process before enforced production, so the timetable and any order for production were set aside and substitute directions were made requiring independent verified lists and explicit identification of co…
24 Aug 2007

INGRAM AND ORS V PATCROFT PROPERTIES LIMITED AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2006-404-4171

Citation

openlaw-f9077a79_3280_4a7c_b6e5_02a00a8dce1e.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court found there was a prima facie basis that specific categories and identifiable documents were or should have been within the defendants' possession or control and ordered further and better discovery of those specified items, declined to make immediate orders concerning unspecified materials left in the premises or the disposed computer but required enquiries and reserved powers to examine individuals on oath if necessary; costs were awarded to the plaintiffs on a 2B basis and case management directions including a trial allocation were given.
24 Feb 2006

PROPHET INVESTMENTS LIMITED V THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE HC WN CIV-2005-485-313

Citation

openlaw-53550f6e_04e2_4c6b_a05e_6d4432a380d8.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court found the Commissioner had established reasonable grounds under r300 that the plaintiff has had possession or control of the specified documents, those documents are relevant under the wide Peruvian Guano test to live association and related issues in the s44 challenge, and discovery is necessary and appropriate now; accordingly the application for further and better discovery was granted and the plaintiff ordered to file an amended affidavit of documents and produce specified categories within 28 days.

New Zealand Case Law

BAY CITIES REAL ESTATE LIMITED V RE/MAX NEW ZEALAND LIMITED HC NAP CIV-2010-441-134

HMI TECHNOLOGIES LTD V SIGNOPSYS ELECTRONIC SIGNS LTD HC AK CIV-2007-404-006229

INGRAM AND ORS V PATCROFT PROPERTIES LIMITED AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2006-404-4171

PROPHET INVESTMENTS LIMITED V THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE HC WN CIV-2005-485-313