New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Practice note compliance

Legal area

Court

21 Apr 2023

WARREN ERNEST BEERE v GEORGE BULLOCK [2023] NZHC 867

Citation

[2023] NZHC 867
Court

High Court

Although the defendants' late memorandum did not neatly fit the Practice Note criteria, the Court exercised its discretion to rescind its minute and admit the 19 September 2022 submissions because, in the interests of justice and given the defendants were self-represented, they should be afforded leniency to ensure the Court had not overlooked points raised at the hearing; consequently the minute of 21 September 2022 was rescinded and the submissions admitted.
28 Jun 2018

R v HUIRUA [2018] NZHC 1568

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1568
Court

High Court

Judge found on balance that the circumstances did not render the admissions unreliable; although the unrecorded prolonged questioning and failure to comply with Practice Note r5 rendered the obtaining of the statements unfair, exclusion would be disproportionate given absence of deliberate police impropriety, spontaneity and corroborative material; accordingly the admissions were admitted into evidence.
26 Mar 2013

FISHER & PAYKEL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED V KARUM GROUP LLC HC AK CIV-2006-404-6646

Citation

openlaw-988481d4_14f7_4011_b4d4_ce229cf227c7.pdf
Court

High Court

Karum failed to show FPF's pleading was deficient under r 5.48 such that responsibility for the post-trial applications lay with FPF; Karum should have identified and advanced the standing issues earlier and its inefficient, non-compliant post-trial conduct unjustified extra cost; therefore FPF is entitled to increased costs (but not indemnity) for all post-trial attendances—costs on category 3 band B uplifted by 50% with disbursements to be certified.
30 Mar 2012

O'Connor v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 106
Court

District Court

Clause 48 applies where the claimant was already entitled to weekly compensation at the time of a further personal injury and therefore the entitlement for incapacity from both injuries must be calculated using the weekly earnings assessed for the earlier entitlement; clauses 32 and 48 operate together so no question of law suitable for High Court leave was identified and leave is refused.
4 Sept 2009

Good v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2009] NZACC 150
Court

District Court

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to take steps to progress the appeal, failed to comply with registry directions and the Practice Note, and did not appear at the scheduled mention, permitting dismissal under Section 161(3)(a) and (b) of the Act.
23 Aug 2007

Lockhart v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2007] NZACC 195
Court

District Court

The appeal is dismissed pursuant to section 161(3)(a) and (b) of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 because the appellant failed to prosecute the appeal and failed to appear at the directions hearing despite being given notice and opportunity to do so.

New Zealand Case Law

WARREN ERNEST BEERE v GEORGE BULLOCK [2023] NZHC 867

R v HUIRUA [2018] NZHC 1568

FISHER & PAYKEL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED V KARUM GROUP LLC HC AK CIV-2006-404-6646

O'Connor v Accident Compensation Corporation

Good v Accident Compensation Corporation

Lockhart v Accident Compensation Corporation