New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Malicious falsehood

Legal area

Court

1 Feb 2018

Robinson v Whangarei Heads Enterprises Limited [2018] NZHC 43

Citation

[2018] NZHC 43
Court

High Court

The formal documentation evidenced an absolute transfer of the 500 shares to the second defendant; the 'options page' was a proposal not a binding contract; plaintiff failed to prove the elements of deceit or injurious falsehood (no proven falsehood and malice or reliance causing loss); further, arrangements designed to defeat creditors would face illegality issues; accordingly all causes of action were dismissed and costs to follow the event.
28 Jul 2014

ZORB LIMITED v AKERS & ORS [2014] NZHC 1756

Citation

[2014] NZCCLR35
Court

High Court

The Court found the OGO website statements were false, published in the course of trade, made with malice or recklessness and with intent to cause pecuniary loss; accordingly the tort of malicious falsehood was established and the same conduct amounted to misleading or deceptive conduct in breach of s 9 FTA; the Court granted a declaration of falsity and a permanent injunction under s 41 and awarded costs to the plaintiff on a scale 2B.
20 Feb 2014

PRESCOTT v AUCKLAND TRANSPORT [2014] NZHC 228

Citation

[2014] NZHC 228
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal out of time was refused because the applicant's explanation for the delay was spurious and unjustified, the proposed grounds of appeal had no real prospect of success (no evidence of bias and no arguable Bill of Rights claim), and the respondent suffered prejudice from delay; consequently extension was not in the interests of justice and the stay of the bankruptcy proceedings was lifted.
2 Nov 2012

CLAGUE V APN NEWS AND MEDIA LTD HC AK CIV-2012-404-006507

Citation

openlaw-07a54110_2cc8_498b_a0ae_0d058cdd76c7.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court refused the interim injunction because the high threshold for restraining a responsible news media organisation was not met: publication of a Police investigation into a high-profile school principal was within legitimate public interest, the plaintiff failed to establish an arguable case of offensive invasion of privacy, defamatory or malicious publication, or probable irreparable harm to his employment sufficient to justify prior restraint.
16 May 2012

PLATEAU FARMS LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP AND LIQUIDATION) & ORS V LAMBERT HC HAM CIV-2012-419-363

Citation

openlaw-ff92c795_affb_4725_9b6b_7fccea5047ba.pdf
Court

High Court

Where a defendant gives clear, comprehensive undertakings protecting the plaintiffs' legitimate interests pending trial, the court may decline to grant coercive interim relief and instead accept those undertakings while fixing a prompt substantive hearing and timetabling; undertakings and protective measures must be tailored to what is reasonably necessary and cannot bind non-parties.
17 Jun 2011

FRANCISC CATALIN DELIU V BOON GUNN HONG HC AK CIV-2010-404-006349

Citation

openlaw-8a6c9438_825e_41e1_b156_915e561aaa90.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court struck out the claim and counterclaim because the proceedings were frivolous and an abuse of court process under r 15.1 and the Court's inherent jurisdiction: the disputes were petty personal attacks between lawyers, lacked the serious protectable interests tort law addresses, and did not justify continued use of court resources even if parts of some causes might be tenuously arguable.

New Zealand Case Law

Robinson v Whangarei Heads Enterprises Limited [2018] NZHC 43

ZORB LIMITED v AKERS & ORS [2014] NZHC 1756

PRESCOTT v AUCKLAND TRANSPORT [2014] NZHC 228

CLAGUE V APN NEWS AND MEDIA LTD HC AK CIV-2012-404-006507

PLATEAU FARMS LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP AND LIQUIDATION) & ORS V LAMBERT HC HAM CIV-2012-419-363

FRANCISC CATALIN DELIU V BOON GUNN HONG HC AK CIV-2010-404-006349