24 Sept 2021
Applicants proved the legal description in clause 3.3 was entered in error and evidence established the testator intended the Paihia property; under s 31 the court amended the will by altering the legal description to match the residential description in the will.
7 Aug 2020
The court will correct identified clerical and numerical errors in the costs judgment under High Court Rules r 11.10 but will not use a recall application to re-open substantive costs determinations or to compel detailed disclosures about private billing arrangements; accordingly specific numerical errors identified were corrected and the judgment was reissued, while substantive incidence of costs and banding decisions were left intact and the request to compel a statutory declaration from counsel was refused.
11 Mar 2020
The court applied r 11.10 and the misnomer principle and corrected the defendant's misspelt name because the statement of claim and incorporated documents made the defendant's identity clear, and the correction caused no injustice allowing the order to be amended without notice.
28 Aug 2017
The Court was satisfied the title reference in the earlier order was an accidental slip and, being an error covered by r 11.10(1) High Court Rules, the order should be amended to refer to Identifier 628710.
4 Aug 2009
The Court exercised its jurisdiction to recall and reissue the 16 July 2009 judgment to correct the erroneous placement and numbering of paragraphs and to amend the index accordingly.
29 Nov 2005
The court applied r 12 of the High Court Rules to correct a clerical error in its earlier judgment and thereby affirmed that the applicant's application for removal of the caveats is granted.