New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leave to withdraw

Legal area

Court

20 Dec 2022

BASSETT v R [2022] NZCA 642

Citation

[2022] NZCA 642
Court

Court of Appeal

Leave to withdraw the 2017 notice of abandonment of the sentence appeal is refused because the abandonment was an unequivocal, deliberate and informed instruction supported by contemporaneous file records and counsel's evidence; the psychiatric material relied on was prepared for unrelated offending, did not establish the applicant's state in 2017 or a causal linkage to the 2014 offending, and the speculative nature of the claim together with finality and prejudice to victims did not justify setting aside the abandonment.
30 Aug 2022

CRIFFEL DEER LIMITED v ANZ BANK NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2022] NZHC 2175

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2175
Court

High Court

Leave to withdraw was granted because the sole reason advanced—non-payment of fees—constituted good cause under the Client Care Rules, counsel had given reasonable notice and had regard to fiduciary duties under r 4.2.3, and the administration of justice did not weigh heavily against withdrawal because judgment had been entered and only costs remained to be determined.
27 Jun 2022

BASSETT v R [2022] NZCA 274

Citation

[2022] NZCA 274
Court

Court of Appeal

Because both parties filed affidavits and sought to cross-examine each other on their contents, the Court exercised its discretion to change the mode of hearing from papers to oral and ordered the application for leave to withdraw the notice of abandonment to be set down for oral hearing.
28 Apr 2022

DEMARCO v R [2022] NZCA 145

Citation

[2022] NZCA 145
Court

Court of Appeal

Leave to withdraw the notice of abandonment was declined because the Court found the abandonment was both deliberate and informed, motivated by a strategic aim to secure parole which would undermine the integrity of the parole process and public interest in finality, no exceptional circumstances existed to justify setting it aside, and the proposed grounds of appeal did not disclose a real risk of miscarriage.
15 Nov 2021

DICKEY v R [2021] NZCA 600

Citation

[2021] NZCA 600
Court

Court of Appeal

Leave to withdraw the notice of abandonment was granted because the appellant's youth, confusion about abandoning the appeal, the seriousness of a life sentence and the arguable merits constituted exceptional circumstances making it necessary in the interests of justice to reinstate the appeal for full consideration.
10 Aug 2021

PATUWAI v R [2021] NZCA 373

Citation

[2021] NZCA 373
Court

Court of Appeal

Leave to withdraw the notice of abandonment was declined because the applicant had abandoned the appeal over five years earlier, took no steps to pursue the application or appeal despite being warned the appeal would be set down, and never particularised grounds of appeal so the Court could not assess its merits; the application was therefore dismissed for want of prosecution.
8 Dec 2015

HURUNUI WATER PROJECT LTD v CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL [2015] NZHC 3098

Citation

[2015] NZHC 3098
Court

High Court

The High Court allowed the appeals, holding the Environment Court erred in concluding that leave is required to withdraw an appeal simply because a consent memorandum had been filed and erred in finding that withdrawal in these circumstances was an abuse of process. A consent memorandum is a negotiated position submitted for the Court's endorsement and does not, without Court orders, amount to a new binding decision, an irrevocable undertaking, or render the consent authority functus officio; consequently Mullen v Parkbrook Holdings Ltd governs and parties may withdraw appeals absent clear ab…
12 May 2015

NORWICH PROPERTIES LIMITED v MARK GRAY ARCHITECT [2015] NZHC 994

Citation

[2015] NZHC 994
Court

High Court

Leave was granted for Norwich to withdraw its application. The Court exercised its s291(1)(a) power to order Norwich to pay accrued penalty interest of $4,168.03 within 10 working days (default permitting liquidation application) because Norwich was unable to pay its debts and the interest debt was not substantially disputed. The Court declined to make a s291(1)(a) order for the costs judgment; instead it assessed and awarded reasonable indemnity costs: $8,177.79 for the setting aside application and $3,068.75 for the costs hearing, excluding GST, limiting recovery because of lack of contempo…
5 Nov 2013

THE OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE AT HAMILTON v LEWTYN MICHAEL SCOTT [2013] NZHC 2919

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2919
Court

High Court

The Associate Judge did not err in granting leave to withdraw because requiring counsel to file an affidavit detailing the breakdown would have compelled disclosure of privileged communications; the Court may rely on counsel's representations and, under its inherent jurisdiction, may permit withdrawal without the formal affidavit or interlocutory application the applicant sought.
17 May 2013

JING ZHAO V BIN BIN YANG HC AK CIV 2011-404-004239

Citation

openlaw-76d2a30a_8e08_449e_9826_cf36397bdcaa.pdf
Court

High Court

There was insufficient evidence of deliberate refusal to follow a court order to justify indemnity costs; however the first defendant ignored directions and failed to give adequate notice of non-attendance, justifying increased costs. The court awarded actual costs for the memoranda and scale 2B for the appearance, resulting in a total award of $1,755 payable immediately.