New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Forgery allegation

Legal area

Court

7 Sept 2020

ROGERS v KENNEDY & ORS [2020] NZHC 2317

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2317
Court

High Court

Indemnity/increased costs refused because there was no obvious, incontrovertible lack of merit and no judicial finding of forgery could be made without a full trial; expert fees of Linda Morrell were approved as reasonable and necessarily incurred disbursements; claimed 2B scale costs were upheld as reasonable given the categorisation and absence of compelling grounds to depart. Plaintiff ordered to pay costs and disbursements accordingly.
11 Aug 2015

RJ ZWARST, LT ZWARST and CJ SAXTON as Trustees of the RJ and LT Zwarst Family Trust v DA SAXTON [2015] NZHC 1888

Citation

[2015] NZHC 1888
Court

High Court

On the evidence before the Court the defendant failed to establish any tenable defence: the period of relevant delay was not attributable to the plaintiffs and did not produce prejudice sufficient to invoke laches, and the alleged misconduct by one trustee (forgery on unrelated documents) was not proven or sufficiently connected to deny the trust's remedy; accordingly summary judgment ordering specific performance was appropriate.
29 Nov 2012

PRESCOTT PENROSE LTD V RENOVATIONS UNLIMITED CO 2005 LTD HC AK CIV-2012-404-1476

Citation

openlaw-ce648f1b_a03a_493a_9cef_2714c3c63b13.pdf
Court

High Court

There are material disputes of fact about the authenticity and use of the discharge instrument and authority form which cannot be resolved on summary s145A procedure; Prescott has shown a reasonably arguable case for its mortgage interest and accordingly the caveat must not lapse pending substantive proceedings.
9 Nov 2012

SIM V LAU HC AK CIV-2011-404-4358

Citation

openlaw-13c8fab3_38b1_47d0_a972_ad6e4a0655df.pdf
Court

High Court

Given the plaintiff's inconsistent and weak evidence (notably the contradicted forgery claim), the lack of causation between the solicitor's conduct and the plaintiff's loss, the Court of Appeal's finding that the proposed appeal was without merit, and the plaintiff's history of non-payment and impecuniosity, it is just to order security for costs of $20,000 and to stay the proceeding until security is provided.
17 Apr 2012

VIVIEN JUDITH MADSEN-RIES AND DAVID STUART VANCE V JOLYON BRENDAN GEORDIE THOMPSON HC AK CIV-2010-404-007159

Citation

openlaw-63cd127d_36c5_4267_bb2c_9660036bfe79.pdf
Court

High Court

Leave to file a further affidavit was refused because the defendant provided no adequate explanation for failing to comply with the court's direction, the seriousness of the alleged forgery compounded the need for timely response, and fairness to the plaintiffs and the integrity of case timetabling required denial of the indulgence; the formal proof application will be determined on the existing papers.
30 Mar 2012

CURRIE v R SC 2/2012

Citation

SC 2/2012
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant's allegations of forgery and perjury were unsubstantiated and inconsistent with the trial record, the material relied on could have been produced at trial and is not appropriate new evidence for this Court to investigate, the Court of Appeal has already assessed credibility, and the proper avenue for investigation of such allegations is s406 of the Crimes Act 1961, not a Supreme Court leave application.
14 Jun 2011

MCDONALD V NARAYAN HC AK CIV-2010-404-7325

Citation

openlaw-df2310e9_1f5a_4c57_ab6c_4e2cbf789a30.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court granted an adjournment because the debtor demonstrated arguable grounds that could justify setting aside the foundation District Court judgment (creditor's authorization to discharge debts, medical evidence of incapacity, and new forgery evidence) and the District Court is the appropriate forum to determine those issues; no real prejudice to the creditor was shown, and therefore the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to adjourn the bankruptcy notice application to permit the District Court to decide the r12.14 rehearing application.
9 Mar 2011

SCHMIDT V PDT TRUSTEES LIMITED HC AK CIV-2011-404-001245

Citation

openlaw-2f155cd5_bb65_4f97_b0ce_69b50e3c9ef2.pdf
Court

High Court

The court ordered delivery up and preservation of the original trust documents because the first defendant possessed documents directly at issue, the plaintiffs had an arguable interest, and there was a real risk of disposal given the defendant's non-cooperation; justice required preservation and forensic examination was authorised.
14 Feb 2011

XUE V LIU HC AK CIV-2010-404-3315

Citation

openlaw-898b34f1_811f_46c8_8f25_f8b0b61a6afb.pdf
Court

High Court

The unsworn, late document examiner's report did not provide a reasonable ground to establish fraud or to raise a triable issue; contemporaneous witness evidence and documents supported that the auction occurred and key signatures were likely genuine; therefore the defendant's material was insufficient to justify adjourning or refusing the plaintiff's application for summary judgment.
15 Jun 2010

NPNZ INVESTMENTS LIMITED V NELSON HC HAM CIV-2010-419-692

Citation

openlaw-9d26750e_81f1_4b2a_8551_a02b85e1acda.pdf
Court

High Court

There was a serious question to be tried about required consent and probable forgery; the balance of convenience favoured granting limited interim relief because continuation of substantial building work could cause irremediable alteration that damages would not adequately compensate, and the defendants' detriment could be minimised by allowing roofing and temporary cladding and by plaintiffs' personal undertakings as to damages.