New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Contribution

Legal area

Court

13 Jun 2022

JOHNS v HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL (recall of judgment) [2022] NZHC 1378

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1378
Court

High Court

The Court granted the recall because it had overlooked the consolidation order and, as a result, omitted necessary express findings about the Council's cross-claim and mutual contribution between the Council and Mr Davey; this oversight constituted a narrow 'very special reason' under r 11.9 and Horowhenua to amend the formal judgment without relitigating substantive findings, as no party was prejudiced and the amendments only clarify previously made liability apportionments and contribution rights.
25 May 2022

IAG NEW ZEALAND LIMITED v QBE INSURANCE (AUSTRALIA) LIMITED [2022] NZCA 208

Citation

[2022] NZCA 208
Court

Court of Appeal

The RSMA imposed a predominantly administrative and co-ordination role on Hawkins with only a narrow quality-assessment function: Hawkins breached its monitoring/certification obligations where it certified completion of work that contained defects both visible to the naked eye and of sufficient seriousness as to compromise the integrity of the building or require substantial remediation; applying that test the Court found the cladding, windows, first-floor balcony structural defects and the previously identified foundations/sub-floor defects were impediments to certification and therefore wi…
17 May 2022

NZ RAILWAYS STAFF WELFARE TRUST v TAURANGA CITY COUNCIL [2022] NZHC 1067

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1067
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities Paradise Coatings Ltd negligently installed the inter-storey junction and negligently prepared a Producer Statement which was misleading and relied on by the Council; the Council thereby became a concurrent tortfeasor and Paradise is liable to contribute 80% of the sums paid by the Council to the plaintiff for the inter-storey junction remediation and related losses, resulting in an award against Paradise of $170,212.60 plus 2B scale costs of $13,942.41.
8 Jun 2021

THODEY v CHE STILE LTD [2021] NZHC 1323

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1323
Court

High Court

Rule 15.23 creates a prima facie entitlement to costs on discontinuance by plaintiffs; the defendants failed to establish circumstances making it just and equitable to displace that presumption given Mr Hill consistently disputed liability and reasonably declined to participate in settlement, so Mr Hill was entitled to costs which were assessed at scale 2B with adjustments to $19,837 plus disbursements $1,399.81.
2 Oct 2020

PENLEY LTD v ATTORNEY GENERAL [2020] NZHC 2601

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2601
Court

High Court

Leave to join Texco Excavating Ltd was granted under r4.4(1)(a) because the Attorney-General demonstrated a realistic entitlement to contribution from Texco for the same damage alleged by Penley and joinder better serves the interests of justice by avoiding multiplicity, inconsistent findings, facilitating discovery and settlement; delay did not outweigh these considerations. The particular discovery application was partially dismissed and partially adjourned for further, proportionate engagement with specified categories and a timetable for submissions.
28 Aug 2018

STEELE v DALLAS [2018] NZHC 2184

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2184
Court

High Court

Applicant failed to prove a reasonably arguable case of a constructive trust: pleaded agreement was ambiguous and effectively contractual/unsecured creditor in nature; March 2017 letter and payments were consistent with a landlord‑tenant arrangement; contributions and maintenance were not shown to be more than minor or causally linked to acquisition/enhancement, and non‑disclosure during bankruptcy undermined the claim; therefore caveat could not be sustained and was allowed to lapse.
13 Jul 2018

The Minister of Education and Others v James Hardie New Zealand [2018] NZHC 1732

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1732
Court

High Court

The Court held that the Building Act 10-year longstop applies to contribution claims; while Carter Holt's delay in serving third party notices was inordinate, the Councils did not establish sufficient prejudice to justify striking out the bulk of the claims; deficient particulars should be remedied by an order for further particulars rather than wholesale strike out; a limited number of contribution claims that were clearly time-barred were struck out; Carter Holt was granted an extension of time to serve third party notices; overall costs were awarded to the Councils but reduced to reflect p…
7 Apr 2016

TERRACEDALE DEVELOPMENTS LTD v CAVELL LEITCH PRINGLE & BOYLE [2016] NZHC 605 [7 April 2016]

Citation

[2016] NZHC 605
Court

High Court

The court held the solicitor-client relationship was a general conveyancing retainer; the defendant breached its duty by failing to raise and investigate the water consents which were material to the land's rural utility; breach caused quantifiable loss and both contract and tort claims succeed, but plaintiff contributed to the loss so damages are reduced by 50%.
12 May 2015

BODY CORPORATE 330324 "CITY GARDENS APARTMENTS" v AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL [2015] NZHC 995

Citation

[2015] NZHC 995
Court

High Court

A cross-claim by a defendant against an existing co-defendant, brought contingently prior to judgment, is not a separate "civil proceeding relating to building work" caught by the Building Act 2004 s393 long-stop; therefore Downer was granted leave to file cross-claims against Auckland City Council and TAL to preserve entitlement to seek contribution under s17 Law Reform Act, and limitation issues remain between the plaintiffs and defendants rather than between defendants inter se.
2 Apr 2015

GILLESPIE v GUEST & OR [2015] NZHC 659

Citation

[2015] NZHC 659
Court

High Court

The claim for contribution was dismissed because Mr Sinclair was liable only as a guarantor and therefore no right of contribution arose under s17(1)(c) of the Law Reform Act 1936 nor in equity; indemnity costs were not warranted, but Mr Sinclair was entitled to costs on a 2B basis for the period he was represented together with reasonable disbursements, with assessment left to the parties.