New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Weathertight homes

Legal area

Court

4 Jun 2014

AUCKLAND COUNCIL v EWINS & ANOR [2014] NZHC 1174

Citation

[2014] NZHC 1174
Court

High Court

On the limited evidence before the Court multiple plausible factual scenarios existed in which Beauchamp could owe a duty of care or be vicariously liable (employees, labour-only contractors, or primary duties in respect of subcontractors); because those possibilities were not 'clearly wrong or unsustainable' the Tribunal erred in declining joinder and Beauchamp must be joined to permit full factual inquiry.
14 Mar 2014

HITEX BUILDING SYSTEMS LIMITED v I C HOLYOAKE [2014] NZHC 475

Citation

[2014] NZHC 475
Court

High Court

The High Court held the Tribunal did not deny natural justice or act with bias, its management of expert evidence and exclusion of late material was within its statutory discretion, the Tribunal's findings of negligence against Hitex and partial personal liability of Holyoake were open on the evidence, a targeted repair would likely require a producer statement which Holyoake/Hitex refused to provide making a full reclad necessary, and it was equitable to increase Hitex/Holyoake's contribution to 73% for refusing to warrant targeted repairs; appeal dismissed.
30 Aug 2013

ALDRIDGE v THE HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL & ANOR [2013] NZHC 2235

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2235
Court

High Court

The judge doubled the standard three‑day allowance for preparation of written submissions to six days because a comparatively large amount of time was reasonably required, but declined to award any uplift because the appellants' failures to comply with timetable orders and the increased length of their submissions did not appreciably increase the time or expense of the proceedings; costs were assessed and fixed accordingly.
21 May 2012

WIGGLESWORTH AND WIGGLESWORTH V AUCKLAND COUNCIL HC AK CIV-2011-404-5043

Citation

openlaw-ba5e5135_3165_474a_b9f4_a7097e59c34a.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court found that substantial construction was practically completed in 1999 so time began to run against the builder for that original construction then and those aspects are time-barred; however the builder carried out relevant remedial work after 27 August 2001 which falls within the ten-year period under s393(2), so summary judgment could not be granted and only post-27 August 2001 work can form the basis of liability in the third party claim.
17 Aug 2011

MCLAUGHLAN V ZHONG HC AK CIV-2011-404-004508

Citation

openlaw-70b30aa4_5c67_4287_b784_7d3babea1aa3.pdf
Court

High Court

The application for a stay was granted by consent; the broad, open-ended request to adduce fresh evidence was refused because the appellant failed the primary criterion that the evidence could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence at first instance. However, because the appellant alleged specific verifiable errors on the face of the Tribunal record (notably the alleged mistaken reference to an exterior cladding inspection and misunderstanding about producer statements) and had limited time to prepare, the Court adjourned to allow the appellant six weeks to produce a focused draft o…
28 Mar 2011

THOMSON V CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL HC CHCH CIV-2010-409-002298

Citation

openlaw-43111c72_60cb_47f7_9ff1_a6a51e3333d7.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court allowed the appeal and held the Adjudicator erred in refusing joinder; on the material before the Tribunal there were arguable causes of action in negligence against Equus (1996 specifications and 2003 inspection/advice) and the long stop/limitation issues could not be resolved as a matter of law at the joinder stage, so Equus should be joined under s33(1) to enable full adjudication of liability and contribution after testing of evidence.
18 Oct 2010

RIVER OAKS FARM LTD & ORS V OLSSON & ORS HC TAU CIV-2009-470-0775

Citation

openlaw-ee1fcc38_31b2_4529_ba2c_5d1e5937c6c4.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court set aside the adjudicator's finding that Sweetman had no liability, held that Sweetman had legal liability for all damage caused by the second leak site (internal gutters), and ordered that Sweetman contribute 25% of the Tribunal's quantum award (based on the parties' experts' agreed apportionment).
18 May 2009

BURNS & ORS V ARGON CONSTRUCTION LTD & ORS HC AK CIV-2008-404-7316

Citation

openlaw-a4fc3176_68d5_4b47_843d_21446248dbdd.pdf
Court

High Court

The Tribunal erred in striking out the claims: significant factual issues existed about whether the true causes and extent of damage were discoverable in 1997 or only in 2003/2004 and whether later distinct damage gave rise to new causes of action; on strike out materials the claims were not so clearly time-barred as to be frivolous or an abuse of process, so the strike out order was reversed.
16 Dec 2008

TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LTD AND ANOR V WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL AND ORS HC WN CIV 2008-485-739

Citation

openlaw-b5e55512_9194_4ca7_88cc_da79387b7aac.pdf
Court

High Court

The adjudicator's finding that the Council was not negligent is upheld because the claimants' evidence was vague and insufficient to rebut compelling, specific expert evidence to the contrary (notably on wind rating and window performance) and because the Notice to Rectify addressed the cladding-ground issue; the claim lacked substantial merit and costs were properly awarded, though the appropriate solicitor costs category is 2 not 3.
29 Sept 2008

JONES AND LEONG V AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL AND ORS HC AK CIV 2005-404-2963

Citation

openlaw-5a5c6e6f_df4f_4653_b86b_c5c7dd762da6.pdf
Court

High Court

The plaintiffs and Council proved liability and quantum by affidavit and documentary evidence and the second and third defendants failed to comply with timetabling orders and did not file evidence; accordingly the court properly entered judgment against those defendants for the proven sums with Judicature Act interest.