New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fixture allocation

Legal area

Court

25 May 2022

CHIN v PAYNE [2022] NZHC 1162

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1162
Court

High Court

Proceedings were consolidated under r10.12 to avoid duplicative hearings; discovery must be proportionate to the issues and not based on suspicion; plaintiff must provide a sworn statement of assets and liabilities and an explanation for the timing of removal of the Camelot Trust corporate trustee; limited discovery from the defendant/beneficiary was ordered as relevant to the alleged inter vivos transfer/gift in the 2006–2007 sale of the company (including 2006/07 and 2007/08 accounts and documents recording the value and subsequent transfer to a family trust), while broad historical financi…
9 Apr 2014

STRAHL v McKINNON AND ORS [2014] NZHC 730

Citation

[2014] NZHC 730
Court

High Court

The applicants failed to establish a sufficient common question of law or fact between the Wellington proceeding and the Auckland Directions proceeding to justify transfer and consolidation under r 10.12/r 10.13; the Wellington issue is a narrow question of statutory/constitutional construction that can be resolved efficiently in Wellington (one to two days), relevant background evidence can be provided by affidavit, and there is real potential prejudice to respondents if consolidation were ordered; therefore the transfer/consolidation application is refused and an early Wellington fixture is…
25 Nov 2010

GRANT PERRY MCGOWAN V THE DISTRICT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH AND ORS CA CA25/2010

Citation

openlaw-eed59a5f_76f6_4f0a_a7f0_a1ed0d98c701.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court granted the extension of time because coordinating the judicial review appeal with the joinder leave application would avoid further substantive delay; the extension was made conditional to require prompt filing and acceptance of an allocated fixture to protect the integrity and expedition of the underlying criminal proceedings.
19 Feb 2008

BEN NEVIS FORESTRY VENTURES LIMITED AND ORS V COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE SC 43/2007

Citation

BEN NEVIS FORESTRY VENTURES LIMITED AND ORS V COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE SC 43/2007
Court

Supreme Court

The adjournment was granted because, although notice had been given and the Registrar had exercised discretion, on the hearing date all counsel for the Ben Nevis parties were insufficiently prepared and, in the interests of justice and fair determination of issues of major public and private importance, the fixture should be vacated and re-fixed with directions for timetable and costs awarded to the respondent.

New Zealand Case Law

CHIN v PAYNE [2022] NZHC 1162

STRAHL v McKINNON AND ORS [2014] NZHC 730

GRANT PERRY MCGOWAN V THE DISTRICT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH AND ORS CA CA25/2010

BEN NEVIS FORESTRY VENTURES LIMITED AND ORS V COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE SC 43/2007