New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Joinder of third party

Legal area

Court

21 May 2021

GAO v STARLIGHT CAPITAL LTD [2021] NZHC 1149

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1149
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal was declined because the proposed appeal lacked sufficient merit and public importance, the alleged errors were irrelevant to the joinder application and were properly matters to be litigated between plaintiffs and the first defendant, and granting leave would cause unjustified delay to imminent interlocutory and substantive hearings; accordingly the stay of the costs order was also refused.
30 Oct 2018

LYTTELTON PORT COMPANY LIMITED v AON NEW ZEALAND & ORS [2018] NZHC 2809 _x000b_

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2809
Court

High Court

The court held that on the facts there was insufficient prima facie evidence to justify joinder of LPC's solicitor as a concurrent tortfeasor given privilege over key communications and lack of evidence that the solicitor caused or contributed to LPC's alleged loss; however, because important questions of law and fact remain—particularly concerning legal privilege (including scope and waiver) and the relationship between placing slips and formal policy wording—the defendant was granted leave to pursue a further appeal to the Court of Appeal limited to those issues.
5 Mar 2014

RENNER v RENNER [2014] NZHC 352

Citation

[2014] NZHC 352
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was refused because the defendant has an arguable defence that the mortgagee sale of the Lochhead Road property may have been at an undervalue benefiting entities associated with the plaintiff, and the plaintiff failed to produce key settlement documents and evidence to exclude that possibility; therefore it could not be shown on summary judgment that no useful purpose would be served by further interlocutory steps, discovery and a defended hearing.
19 Nov 2010

BODY CORPORATE 204464 AND ANOR V WAITAKERE CITY COUNCIL AND ORS HC AK CIV 2008-404-007428

Citation

openlaw-e9c81d71_e3d1_421a_936e_5d2c595cf269.pdf
Court

High Court

Leave was granted because the court was satisfied QBE had been given an opportunity to be heard, relevant policy cover had been identified making an arguable case against the insured, and urgency arising from imminent expiry of the ten year long stop justified joinder under s 9 of the Law Reform Act 1936.
11 Aug 2009

KAI ZHANG V XIABEN LIU, PRACTISING AS BEN LIU & CO HC AK CIV 2009-404-001069

Citation

openlaw-46b21529_700c_47a9_973c_1c360675a7e1.pdf
Court

High Court

Joinder was granted because McBreens acted for the covenanting parties, drafted and registered the covenant, and their involvement is central to any claim of negligence or indemnity; the preliminary question on the covenant's interpretation was ordered because its resolution could dispose of the plaintiff's claim and shorten litigation, and the applications were made at an early stage making joinder and a separate question appropriate and proportionate.
20 Mar 2008

GOUGH FINANCE LTD V C J HARVESTING LTD AND ORS HC ROT CIV 2006-463-914

Citation

openlaw-87a63d45_bb14_4696_9146_727b67c1963e.pdf
Court

High Court

There was a live, non‑frivolous issue of commonality—whether the first defendant was entitled to cancel the lease due to alleged defects and misrepresentations by persons associated with GGH—which justified joinder under r75; the Associate Judge did not err in principle or discretion in granting leave to join GGH, and the summary judgment application remains extant and may be advanced to hearing despite joinder.
19 Mar 2008

GRAHAM AND ANOR V WESTVIEW FUNERAL CARE LIMITED HC AK CIV 2006-404-6229

Citation

openlaw-1c89672c_5376_4813_b56e_e37eca1c4cb5.pdf
Court

High Court

On the balance of factors the court concluded the plaintiff was impecunious before re-entry, the plaintiff's substantive claims had weak prospects of success on the evidence of rent arrears and lease rights to re-enter and to take fixtures, delay by applicants was not egregious and security for costs should be ordered; accordingly aggregate security of NZD 35,000 was ordered by 8 April 2008, proceedings stayed until provided, joinder of the former solicitor was declined, and costs of the application were awarded to the applicants on a 2B basis with disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.

New Zealand Case Law

GAO v STARLIGHT CAPITAL LTD [2021] NZHC 1149

LYTTELTON PORT COMPANY LIMITED v AON NEW ZEALAND & ORS [2018] NZHC 2809 _x000b_

RENNER v RENNER [2014] NZHC 352

BODY CORPORATE 204464 AND ANOR V WAITAKERE CITY COUNCIL AND ORS HC AK CIV 2008-404-007428

KAI ZHANG V XIABEN LIU, PRACTISING AS BEN LIU & CO HC AK CIV 2009-404-001069

GOUGH FINANCE LTD V C J HARVESTING LTD AND ORS HC ROT CIV 2006-463-914

GRAHAM AND ANOR V WESTVIEW FUNERAL CARE LIMITED HC AK CIV 2006-404-6229