New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Breach of duty of care

Legal area

Court

17 Jul 2018

IVANISHVILI v CREDIT SUISSE AG [2018] NZHC 1755

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1755
Court

High Court

Plaintiffs established bona fide claims against the New Zealand trustee (CSTNZ) such that r6.27(2)(h) is satisfied, but plaintiffs failed to show New Zealand is the appropriate forum for trial of claims against Credit Suisse AG and Lota. Switzerland is the forum with the most real and substantial connection and can provide effective relief; leave to serve would not have been granted under r6.28 and no special circumstances require NZ to retain the Bank and Lota claims. Result: claims against Credit Suisse AG and Lota dismissed; claim against Credit Suisse Trust Ltd stayed and proceedings agai…
17 May 2018

TUCKER & ORS v MUSSON BUILDING SERVICES LIMITED & ORS [2018] NZHC 1089

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1089
Court

High Court

On the evidence the second defendant breached duties of care in supervising and carrying out the building works causing quantified losses, and he converted cedar cladding that had become the plaintiffs' property; the oral personal guarantee was unenforceable under the Property Law Act 2007 and was not relied on, therefore judgment was awarded to the plaintiffs against the second defendant for the quantified sums.
17 Nov 2016

COX AND COX v RICE CRAIG SOLICITORS NOMINEE COMPANY LIMITED [2016] NZHC 2745 [17 November 2016]

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2745
Court

High Court

The court found the threshold under r 5.45(1)(b) established because the plaintiffs are balance-sheet insolvent when their New Zealand liabilities to the defendant are taken into account, and exercised its discretion under r 5.45(2) to order security for costs of NZD 25,000 because the plaintiffs' claims were relatively weak and there was a significant risk to the defendant of a barren costs order; accordingly the proceeding was stayed until payment of that security.
28 Sept 2016

M J DAISLEY and SDD LIMITED v ARK CONTRACTORS LIMITED, P G KELLER and K E KELLER and THOMSON LAW [2016] NZHC 2300

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2300
Court

High Court

Security for costs was ordered because the plaintiff's limited and unsubstantiated financial evidence, outstanding judgment against him, lack of demonstrable income and uncertain value of claimed Ark shareholding showed he was likely unable to pay costs; accordingly the court ordered specific security payments and stayed the proceedings until paid; the proceeding was transferred to the Whangarei Registry under HCR 5.1 because Ark was controlled and managed from Whangarei and most parties and witnesses are located there; the proceeding is to be case managed with CIV 2016-488-041 and heard sequ…
17 Dec 2012

NORTH DAIRY LTD V AGRICULTURAL CONTRACTING LTD HC TIM CIV-2011-476-10

Citation

openlaw-4693c337_d435_4104_823f_76f3f1a102dc.pdf
Court

High Court

Defendant breached the implied duty of care by negligently applying glyphosate (likely through decanting/mislabelling), which caused damage to 53 hectares; plaintiff proved causation and quantum on the balance of probabilities and is entitled to damages of $257,687, interest at the Judicature Act rate and costs on a 2B basis.
4 Sept 2007

KERRIDGE V KERRIDGE AND ORS HC AK CIV 2006-404-001393

Citation

openlaw-c285050e_370e_4c51_9458_b5507a4f5299.pdf
Court

High Court

The Property (Relationships) Act s4 does not displace the plaintiff's tort causes of action because those claims are not transactions between spouses transferring property; s4(4) does not mandate striking out but prescribes how relationship property questions are to be determined. The Limitation Act six‑year bar applies to omissions and breaches that accrued in 1998 and those parts of the pleading are statute‑barred. The plaintiff failed to establish a fairly arguable case of fraudulent concealment under s28 to postpone limitation for those time‑barred parts. Consequently specified paragraphs…

New Zealand Case Law

IVANISHVILI v CREDIT SUISSE AG [2018] NZHC 1755

TUCKER & ORS v MUSSON BUILDING SERVICES LIMITED & ORS [2018] NZHC 1089

COX AND COX v RICE CRAIG SOLICITORS NOMINEE COMPANY LIMITED [2016] NZHC 2745 [17 November 2016]

M J DAISLEY and SDD LIMITED v ARK CONTRACTORS LIMITED, P G KELLER and K E KELLER and THOMSON LAW [2016] NZHC 2300

NORTH DAIRY LTD V AGRICULTURAL CONTRACTING LTD HC TIM CIV-2011-476-10

KERRIDGE V KERRIDGE AND ORS HC AK CIV 2006-404-001393