19 Sept 2022
Because the appellant's claim was for breach of contract and not an application under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976, the Family Court did not have exclusive jurisdiction and the District Court retains jurisdiction; s 4(4) of the PRA governs substantive treatment of relationship property issues in non-PRA proceedings but does not confer exclusive jurisdiction on the Family Court.
25 Aug 2022
The District Court had jurisdiction because the claim was for a debt within its monetary limit ($999); an affirmative defence alleging breaches of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act and Rules does not oust jurisdiction where the substantive claim is within jurisdiction; no procedural unfairness or error of law was established on appeal; accordingly the appeal is dismissed and costs awarded to respondents.
31 Mar 2022
Section 313(1)(c) only authorises orders enforcing the express or implied terms of an easement; the asbestos pipeline was not shown to be dangerous and was not required by the easement to be removed, the replaced pipe remains part of the public work and FNDC remains responsible to keep it safely buried (including by asbestos management and inspection), and s 313 does not empower removal of the driveway because the driveway was not work required under the terms of the pipeline easement; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
2 Feb 2021
The application for transfer under s70 is dismissed because the charges and facts do not require High Court attention and the applicant provided no evidence that the District Court is unlawful or incapable of providing a fair hearing; therefore the statutory threshold for transfer was not met.
3 Sept 2018
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying a direct appeal to the Supreme Court and did not challenge the validity of the produced warrant; the proposed arguments about native customary title do not produce the required exceptional circumstances.
22 Jun 2016
The plaintiff was entitled to costs on the High Court 2B scale but reduced by 35% to reflect partial success by the defendants; communications marked without prejudice simpliciter were inadmissible on costs and were put aside; certain disbursements and expert fees were disallowed or reduced and the court applied a 65:35 success ratio to disbursements, resulting in orders for $24,705.85 costs and $18,359.29 disbursements in favour of the plaintiff.
4 Mar 2016
Because the transfer to the High Court for trial was correct and the outstanding District Court matters were unrelated and not transferred, the High Court retains jurisdiction for sentencing the arson charge and there is no statutory power to order that sentencing occur in the District Court; accordingly sentencing will proceed in the High Court on 22 March 2016.
17 Jul 2015
The Accident Compensation Act 2001 is an exclusive statutory regime governing claims arising from personal injury; the relationship between ACC and claimants is statutory not contractual, therefore the Contractual Remedies Act 1979 and Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 do not apply to this claim; s128 bars payment for overseas rehabilitation costs and the District Court therefore cannot grant the remedies sought; appeal dismissed.
6 Nov 2014
The application to transfer was dismissed because the trustees' debt claim cannot be transferred to the Family Court, the defendant's counterclaim for division of relationship property must be removed from the High Court but cannot remain here, and on balance of discretionary factors (case nature as civil debt litigation ready for trial in the High Court, lack of complexity, convenience, risk of delay on transfer, defendant's failure to pay a prior costs order and availability of High Court procedural protections) it was not just or appropriate to transfer the proceeding to the Family Court.
30 Jun 2014
Because the District Court lacks inherent jurisdiction to make costs orders against a solicitor personally and the respondent did not seek costs against the appellant, the application for costs against Mr Nee Harland must be dismissed.