New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Arbitration clause

Legal area

Court

30 Jun 2023

STREET AND COOK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD v CAMBRIDGE TERRACES LTD [2023] NZHC 1673

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1673
Court

High Court

The Kearneys fund was held in CTL's name under an undertaking that expressly referenced payment pursuant to a court order; s 79 of the Construction Contracts Act 2002 prevents CTL asserting a set-off against SCC's adjudication judgment in these recovery proceedings; SCC had given valid notice of arbitration so the engineer's formal decisions were not final and binding; the High Court may use its inherent jurisdiction to direct payment from the trust fund. Accordingly the interim charging order was made final and payment from the Kearneys fund to SCC was ordered; CTL's application for summary…
16 Jun 2023

Redcoats Ltd v Day & Ando Realty Ltd [2023] NZHC 1502

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1502
Court

High Court

The application to set aside the without‑notice interim restraining orders was dismissed because there remains a serious question to be tried about the enforceability of the three‑month, 15 km restraint; the arbitration clause did not preclude interim relief; damages would be an inadequate remedy in the factual matrix (overlap of clients and continuation from same premises); and the balance of convenience and overall justice favour maintaining the interim injunctions.
6 Apr 2023

RYAN v LOBB [2023] NZHC 689

Citation

[2023] NZHC 689
Court

High Court

Clause 2.5(3) must be read and applied primarily by reference to the settlors' financial contributions as recorded in the contemporaneous trust deeds and accounts (including gifts/forgiveness of debt); subjective or unilateral post‑settlement claims (labour, project management, payments via LML, GST refunds) do not alter entitlement under that clause. The Court may exercise the trustees' mandatory resettlement power where no suitable trustees exist and implement resettlement. Applying those principles, assets (other than watches/jewellery and subject to valuation adjustments for the antique f…
16 Mar 2023

CARTER v CANTERBURY DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT LIMITED [2023] NZHC 529

Citation

[2023] NZHC 529
Court

High Court

The Court set aside the appearance insofar as the statement of claim concerned the asserted entitlement to shares and appointment of a director because the shareholders agreement already recorded Swann as a shareholder and his nominee as a director as at its date; the defendants had no arguable legal defence to refuse transfer based on the working capital issue, so the arbitration clause did not bar the Court from determining the share/director claim and the 'clean hands' defence did not apply where defendants had no legal justification for refusing to transfer.
14 Mar 2022

KUOCH v GANDA [2022] NZHC 452

Citation

[2022] NZHC 452
Court

High Court

Because the tenant's failure to give renewal notice was inadvertent, the tenant acted promptly to seek renewal, there was no evidence of tenant misconduct, and the lessor suffered no substantive prejudice (IGC issues either not attributable to tenant pre-assignment, subject to lease provisions or already credited), the Court exercised its wide remedial discretion under s264 to order renewal of the existing lease; the Court will not vary contractual terms or impose IGC payment as a condition absent a determination of liability under the lease.
14 Oct 2021

BOOL v HAMMOND [2021] NZHC 2749

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2749
Court

High Court

Leave to commence the s 339 proceeding by originating application under Pt 19 was refused because the dispute raised multiple contested factual and legal issues, potential cross-claims and contractual/arbitration questions, and therefore required formal pleadings, discovery, interlocutory steps and possibly oral evidence; permitting Pt 19 would not be in the interests of justice.
22 Sept 2020

GLENN WILLIAM SCHAEFFER v JAMES JOSEPH MURREN [2020] NZSC 98

Citation

[2020] NZSC 98
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal dismissed because the proposed ground that the High Court was required to apply Nevada law despite no pleading or proof of foreign law lacked merit under established conflict-of-laws principles that require pleading and proof of foreign law and default to domestic law; the other grounds were fact-specific and would not alter the outcome given the negligent misstatement finding would remain.
30 Jun 2020

KKESHAV INTERNATIONAL LIMITED v HEATON HOLDINGS LIMITED [2020] NZHC 1513 [30 June 2020]

Citation

(2020) 21 NZCPR 125
Court

High Court

The tenant's claim for retrospective rental abatement is in substance a set-off; the leases require rent to be paid without deduction and the arbitration clause does not suspend that obligation, therefore the statutory demand was properly issued and must not be set aside.
10 Jun 2020

SCHAEFFER v MURREN [2020] NZCA 224

Citation

[2020] NZCA 224
Court

Court of Appeal

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to show that Nevada law governed all causes of action; Dicey Rule 25 requires foreign law to be pleaded and proved and no exceptional circumstance existed to displace application of New Zealand law; Associate Judge Matthews had validly found the partnership and arbitration clauses did not apply to the claims and New Zealand was an appropriate forum, so the High Court correctly applied New Zealand law.
16 Mar 2020

SUN AOHUA NZ LIMITED v KASH INVESTMENT LIMITED [2020] NZHC 520

Citation

[2020] NZHC 520
Court

High Court

Because the lease contained a mandatory arbitration clause and the respondents had promptly sought arbitration, the applicant acted unreasonably by commencing and pursuing High Court proceedings instead of arbitration; the applicant's conduct made the court process unnecessary and justifies refusal of the applicant's wasted costs claim and an award of costs to the respondents on a 2B basis.