New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Onus of proof

Legal area

Court

6 Oct 2023

PUBLIC TRUST v FRAEI & ORS [2023] NZHC 2796

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2796
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the 10 April 2008 will was executed with requisite testamentary capacity because it preceded the documented rapid cognitive decline (post-Jan 2009), was supported by contemporaneous instructions taken by an experienced Public Trust officer, and the changes made were not irrational or unexplained; wills executed in 2009–2010 lacked requisite capacity based on medical evidence
6 Jun 2023

RAEWYN WALLACE v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2023] NZSC 66

Citation

[2023] NZSC 66
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the issues of general importance identified (objective element of self-defence, reverse onus in s 8 claims, and whether a private prosecution can satisfy the State's investigation obligation) were either unlikely to change the outcome on the established facts or the case was an unsuitable vehicle for resolving them; therefore no leave was granted.
9 May 2022

AVONDALE PASTORAL LTD PARTNERSHIP v SAUNDERS DAIRY HOLDINGS LTD [2022] NZHC 966

Citation

[2022] NZHC 966
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed. On the rehearing the Court found Avondale failed to prove the cows were in better condition when sent to Saunders or that deterioration and subsequent deaths were caused by Saunders Dairy's failure to provide the agreed feed or to take unreasonable care. The grazier's duty is to take reasonable care and is not a guarantee of condition; burden shifts to grazier only after owner proves a prima facie case of loss attributable to the grazier. The High Court had jurisdiction and extended time to permit the appeal since the earlier judgment had been recalled and substituted…
13 Apr 2022

OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE v MACKENZIE [2022] NZHC 781

Citation

[2022] NZHC 781
Court

High Court

The Court found the 2014 written fee agreements were not exhaustive and were supplemented by an oral agreement entitling Brian to remuneration; on the balance of probabilities Brian proved an entitlement and, because no agreed rate could be reliably fixed, the appropriate remedy was quantum meruit assessed by reference to market value and reasonableness, resulting in admission of the claim and assessment of remuneration at NZD 225,000 plus GST.
11 Apr 2022

POMALE v R [2022] NZHC 740

Citation

[2022] NZHC 740
Court

High Court

The trial judge's adverse credibility findings against the appellant were supported by the evidence; given the absence of any innocent explanation for the appellant's fingerprints on the stolen presentation box and deference owed to the trial judge on credibility, the conviction was properly maintained and no miscarriage of justice occurred; extension of time to file the notice of appeal was granted.
24 Feb 2022

PAIHIA PROPERTY HOLDINGS CORPORATE TRUSTEE LIMITED v BODY CORPORATE 190356 [2022] NZSC 12

Citation

[2022] NZSC 12
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds did not raise questions of general or public importance nor disclose a civil miscarriage of justice; the Court of Appeal's application of Synlait to the facts (including consideration of future development and incidental effects) was within the court's purview and the applicant bore the onus to produce evidence of likely development, which it did not; extension of time was granted but leave was dismissed.
23 Dec 2021

PUBLIC TRUST v COUTTS [2021] NZHC 3620

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3620
Court

High Court

Given the specialist diagnosis of moderate dementia in April 2016, consistent contemporaneous clinical records and the unchallenged retrospective expert opinion that the testator lacked capacity in 2017, the Court was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the testator had testamentary capacity when executing the 2017 will; by contrast there was no clinical evidence of cognitive impairment in 2008 and the 2008 will was rational on its face so probate of the 2008 will was granted.
15 Nov 2021

HWANG v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZCA 602

Citation

[2021] NZCA 602
Court

Court of Appeal

The application for recall was declined because the material did not show any very special reason under Uhrle v R or a real likelihood of a miscarriage of justice, the application effectively re-argued earlier dismissed grounds, and recall was inappropriate while statutory appeal rights (including seeking leave to the Supreme Court under s 243) remained unexhausted.
8 Sept 2021

WILLIAMS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 2345

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2345
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal was granted because the two legal questions identified are questions of law capable of serious argument and of public importance: (1) whether the Human Rights Review Tribunal may grant summary judgment absent express statutory authority, and (2) the correct interpretation of s48 OIA including who bears the burden of proof and whether good faith is presumed.
31 Aug 2021

BODY CORPORATE 193056 v CHIN YUN HOLDINGS LIMITED [2021] NZCA 411

Citation

[2021] NZCA 411
Court

Court of Appeal

The appeal was allowed because the applicant (respondent in the appeal) failed to discharge the onus under s 317(1)(d) to prove the proposed complete relocation of the right of way would not substantially injure the easement holders; in particular the applicant produced no evidence of the nature of likely development enabled by relocation, and that absence meant potential intangible harms to amenity and value could not be discounted, requiring the High Court modification to be set aside.