New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Jurisdiction of arbitrator

Legal area

Court

27 May 2021

HARMON v OCEANIA FOOTBALL CONFEDERATION INCORPORATED [2021] NZHC 1210

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1210
Court

High Court

The court must enforce the CAS award under art 35(1)(b) Sch 1 because OFC failed to establish any statutory ground for refusal under art 36: OFC had the opportunity to present and did present art 11 before the arbitrator so there was no breach of natural justice or inability to present its case, and the award did not decide matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration; consequently the award is enforced by entry as a judgment.
19 Feb 2019

HUTCHISON v CLIFFE [2019] NZHC 201

Citation

[2019] NZHC 201
Court

High Court

The applicants' leave application was, by a narrow margin, within time because their 5 April 2018 memorandum constituted a request under art 33 for interpretation/additional award such that the time to bring the leave application ran from disposal of that request; there was sufficient indication of error on questions capable of substantially affecting rights to justify granting leave to appeal, therefore leave is granted.
22 May 2014

QUEENSTOWN MINI GOLF LIMITED v BRECON STREET PARTNERSHIP LIMITED [2014] NZHC 1101

Citation

[2014] NZHC 1101
Court

High Court

The interim injunction was declined because the arbitral tribunal is competent under Article 16 to rule on its jurisdiction as to whether the parties agreed the rent at renewal, the arbitration clause covers the dispute, no abuse of process was established to justify court intervention, and the plaintiff's concerns were mitigated by the defendant's undertakings and the ability to seek Court review under Article 16(3).
16 Oct 2012

HIGHGATE ON BROADWAY LIMITED V DEVINE HC BLE CIV-2012-406-000136

Citation

openlaw-d5cf527d_0474_40be_8337_d2ce465052be.pdf
Court

High Court

The tenant did not validly elect to abandon arbitration by commencing court proceedings under the Property Law Act; the damages claims could not properly be determined in the court proceeding under ss253-264 and therefore fall within the broad arbitration clause; Article 8(2) permits arbitral proceedings to continue despite concurrent court proceedings; accordingly the arbitrator has jurisdiction and a stay is not warranted.
20 Jul 2012

LIPP AND CHANEY HC AK CIV 2011-404-008091

Citation

openlaw-264176ce_629e_4200_8f22_06691b691935.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court upheld the arbitrator's factual findings that the Lipps (through deposited plans and solicitor's assurances) made clear representations that the upper driveway was common, the Chaneys reasonably relied and suffered detriment up to 30 August 2010, and it would be unconscionable to resile; the arbitrator therefore lawfully granted expectation-based relief conferring common use and ordered new plans and leases, except that the arbitrator's direction that any changes to the houses' footprints be embodied in new plans exceeded the submission and was set aside.
4 May 2009

TODD PETROLEUM MINING COMPANY LIMITED V SHELL (PETROLEUM MINING) COMPANY LIMITED HC WN CIV-2008-485-2816

Citation

openlaw-1fb012d5_6594_4a21_ab8d_8b10d38422c6.pdf
Court

High Court

The judge exercised discretion to avoid premature exclusion of contested affidavit material, ordered specific amendments to the challenged affidavits so they may be read, granted narrowly confined leave for Shell to file further reply affidavits limited to whether and how Shell sought to use a KMC casting vote since March 2002, admitted specified exhibits, and reserved costs; this balanced interests of justice, avoiding undue prejudice while permitting full airing at the substantive hearing.
16 Jun 2006

ATTORNEY-GENERAL V FEARY HC WN CIV-2006-485-610

Citation

openlaw-ba2b9eda_2222_4371_8903_7983160fecc1.pdf
Court

High Court

Interpreting clause 2 of the 2004 Settlement Agreement in its factual matrix, including clause 10 of the 2002 Deed and the complex history between the parties, the phrase "the correct interpretation of clause 4" embraces the construction of the agreement recorded in clause 4 and therefore includes consideration of alleged implied terms and, subject to evidential and pleading constraints, alleged oral terms; accordingly the arbitrator has jurisdiction to determine those issues and the Court upheld the arbitrator's ruling.
11 May 2006

DOWNER CONSTRUCTION (NEW ZEALAND) LTD V SILVERFIELD DEVELOPMENTS LTD (FORMERLY REDWOOD GROUP NO 8 LTD) HC AK CIV-2005-404-6800

Citation

openlaw-e7982ffc_90ab_4f46_9f8e_581c134beb7b.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court held the arbitrator did not err in law: specific performance (ordering Downer to remedy defects) was available and appropriate despite Silverfield not having possession and lacking a right to sue for purchasers' losses, because Downer had contractually promised repair as the primary remedy, damages were inadequate or impracticable to quantify or procure given widespread defects and difficulty in engaging substitute contractors, the order was sufficiently precise and conditional on owners' consents and the arbitrator acted within his discretion and jurisdiction under the Arbitra…