New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Abuse of process

Legal area

Court

21 Dec 2023

SAVAGE GARAGE NZ LTD v PERAMUNE [2023] NZHC 3864

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3864
Court

High Court

There was a genuine and substantial dispute about the existence and terms of the debt that could not be resolved in statutory demand proceedings; Peramune was put on notice by Savage Garage on 16 June 2023 and nevertheless persisted with the statutory demand and opposition to the set-aside application, so increased costs were justified under r14.6 of the High Court Rules; accordingly Peramune was ordered to pay Savage Garage increased costs and disbursements of $18,182.42.
19 Dec 2023

DIGBY JOHN NOYCE v PENDRELL INVESTMENTS LIMITED [2023] NZHC 3778

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3778
Court

High Court

The receiver had standing to apply under s142 LTA because his court-appointed powers to sell the Trust property constituted an interest affected by caveats; Pendrell's caveat was invalid because it forfeited its contract by failing to settle; none of the other five caveators (Stuart Lobb, Lothbury Management Ltd, WAG/WAG Trustees, Warwick Lobb, Mattson Partnership) demonstrated a reasonably arguable caveatable interest or their claims were inconsistent with prior judgments and orders, were unarguable or constituted abuse of process, and accordingly all six caveats were ordered removed; the Co…
12 Dec 2023

BODY CORPORATE 68792 v MEMELINK AND FORSTER [2023] NZHC 3637

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3637
Court

High Court

The interlocutory application to remove the court-appointed administrator was struck out because proceedings by or against the trust are stayed by the receivership orders unless the receivers consent or the Court orders otherwise, the application constituted an abuse of process and impermissible relitigation, the trustees did not have standing to pursue removal when the trust (in receivership) is the unit owner and no leave or consent was obtained, and the administrator's failure to lodge a sealed order on title did not invalidate his appointment.
11 Dec 2023

FULLER v DISTRICT COURT AT WAITĀKERE [2023] NZCA 634

Citation

[2023] NZCA 634
Court

Court of Appeal

The short one‑week delay by a lay litigant with an understandable explanation, combined with absence of prejudice and the view that the proposed appeal was not clearly hopeless (given JR can be available despite an appeal route and r 5.35B should be used sparingly), meant the interests of justice required an extension of time under r 43(2).
6 Dec 2023

PETROMONT HOLDINGS LTD v THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES [2023] NZHC 3535

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3535
Court

High Court

The proceeding is struck out because the pleaded causes of action fundamentally seek to challenge and unravel Parliament's statutory allocations in Schedule 14 of the Fisheries Amendment Act 2004 and therefore are both legally untenable and an abuse of process; a legitimate expectation cannot be used to compel actions contrary to statute and the relief sought is not available by judicial review.
5 Dec 2023

DFT v MANUKAU FAMILY COURT & ORS [2023] NZCA 619

Citation

[2023] NZCA 619
Court

Court of Appeal

Family Court guardianship and contact orders concerning care of children do not constitute 'detention' under the Habeas Corpus Act 2001; the High Court may strike out plainly abusive habeas corpus proceedings under High Court Rules r 5.35B; habeas corpus is not the appropriate remedy to collaterally attack Family Court custody/guardianship decisions and leave to file further material post‑hearing is refused absent exceptional circumstances.
28 Nov 2023

MARONG v ATTORNEY_x001e_GENERAL [2023] NZHC 3412

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3412
Court

High Court

The amended statement of claim was struck out as an abuse of process because it was prolix, largely incomprehensible, pleaded excessive evidential material and irrelevant matters, rendering it impossible for defendants to respond; the interlocutory injunction application was struck out as it had no independent life and the proceeding was brought to an end; costs reserved.
23 Nov 2023

QUENTIN STOBART HAINES v ROY WILLIAM BASSETT-BURR [2023] NZCA 591

Citation

[2023] NZCA 591
Court

Court of Appeal

The recall application was declined because it was a relitigation of the merits, failed to identify any overlooked material or new evidence that would have altered the outcome, and therefore did not meet the threshold for recall; the applicant's remedy is to apply for leave to the Supreme Court. Costs were awarded to the respondent on a band A basis to reflect additional memorandum filings.
21 Nov 2023

GEORGE GRANT ENGINEERING LIMITED v STEELRITE ENGINEERING LIMITED [2023] NZHC 3295

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3295
Court

High Court

The application to recall the sealed 20 July 2020 costs order was dismissed because the subsequent concession by GGE in unrelated proceedings did not amount to fresh evidence justifying reopening, abuse of process was not established, the circumstances were not sufficiently exceptional to invoke the Court's inherent jurisdiction, and it was inappropriate to reassess a sealed costs order absent cogent new material and with the original Judge unavailable.
20 Nov 2023

DUNSTAN v WELLINGTON DISTRICT COURT & ANOR [2023] NZHC 3280

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3280
Court

High Court

Leave to continue the judicial review is refused because the proposed private prosecution is an abuse of process and without merit; statements in a procedural judicial telephone conference do not fall within s111 Crimes Act conduct, the formal statement provided was insufficient to justify a trial, and the existing s166 restraint order binds the court absent a demonstrated meritorious basis for leave.