New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Mere conduit defence

Legal area

Court

24 Jul 2009

ELLIS V RED EAGLE CORPORATION LIMITED CA CA713/2008

Citation

openlaw-d99e490c_1e2d_429c_91d1_807c1f039988.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held Ellis was merely passing on information supplied by Ms Black and his emails contained puffery and no verification; the decisive misleading information came from Ms Black's financial statement which Ellis did not generate or confirm, so it was not reasonable to attribute the lender's loss to Ellis under s 9 and there was no sufficient causal nexus between Ellis's conduct and Red Eagle's loss.
17 May 2006

NEWPORT V COBURN AND ORS CA CA234/04

Citation

openlaw-64c8c810_4468_499e_b66d_6c2250595cc4.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

Appellant held to be an employee; for Leemings the evidence did not establish he knew representations were false and on the facts he merely conveyed employer‑prepared material without embellishment so mere conduit defence applied; for Coburns he knew claims of exclusive contracts were false and was knowingly concerned in ISL's contravention and thus liable under s 43(1)(d), but liability discounted to reflect his lesser role (reduced to NZD 5,000).