New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Proportionality of disclosure

Legal area

Court

29 Nov 2022

MIDGLEY v BRUMBY & Anor [2022] NZHC 3158

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3158
Court

High Court

The Court ordered both the plaintiff and the second defendant to file affidavits stating their financial positions as at the date of the deceased's death because those positions are materially relevant to assessing whether there was a breach of moral duty; the broader categories of tailored discovery sought by the applicant were disproportionate at this stage and may be sought later if justified once affidavits provide a focused factual basis.
1 Aug 2019

COMMONS v COMMONS [2019] NZHC 1850

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1850
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify arguable errors of law or fact in the discovery judgment of sufficient merit or public importance to justify the delay and cost of an appeal; the High Court's tailored discovery approach was proportionate and consistent with established authorities limiting inquiry into inter vivos transfers for Family Protection claims; the discovery ordered (including financial statements and trustee records of decisions) was sufficient to enable the supervisory and tracing functions of the Court without intrusive, disproportionate disclos…
28 Aug 2018

DODSON MOTORSPORT LIMITED v LOGIICAL PERFORMANCE LIMITED [2018] NZHC 2331 [28 August 2018]

Citation

[2018] NZAR 1480
Court

High Court

Telephone records were ordered because, in the context of defendants' claimed oral business practice and conspiracy allegations, timing, frequency and clustering of calls were relevant and proportionate to obtain; laser-writing records were ordered because they were a narrow category likely to exist, relevant to quantifying parts and linking laser-writers, and proportionate; documents relating to manufacture/order/shipment were not ordered because there were no sufficient grounds to displace the presumption that existing affidavits of documents were complete.
13 Aug 2018

HUNTER v N [2018] NZHC 2040

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2040
Court

High Court

The Court ordered targeted supplementary discovery: the plaintiff must provide a supplementary affidavit of documents addressing the defendants' specified categories (including stating whether recordings or additional Ultimate Mobile reports exist and producing medical records), produce medical records initially to opposing counsel under strict confidentiality restrictions, and the defendants must file a supplementary affidavit by an appropriate Corrections officer as to existence and production of drafts/memos; statistical EM data was refused as disproportionate but interrogatories and leave…
28 Mar 2018

Clements v Auckland Council [2018] NZHC 553

Citation

[2018] NZHC 553
Court

High Court

The court dismissed the applicant's discovery application because the categories were overbroad, disproportionate and in large part irrelevant to the March 2016 Council decision (including requests for post-decision materials and documents about other properties); the court declined to order security for costs despite the applicant's bankruptcy because ordering the requested security would likely stifle the proceeding, the applicant was not clearly a nominal plaintiff representing others, there was some public interest in the matter, and the claim was not demonstrably hopeless at interlocutor…
18 May 2017

WALKER v FORBES [2017] NZHC 1023

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1023
Court

High Court

The Court refused most of the plaintiffs' discovery requests on grounds of confidentiality, lack of demonstrated relevance and disproportionality, ordered PWC to discover internal IFRS guidance documents 2006-2008, reserved the Elgin audit issue pending PWC instructions, refused disclosure/orders concerning Hanover conflict checks and 'My Client' system access, and directed PWC (and if possible Mr Noone) to file a further affidavit within 28 days answering specified questions about missing documents; costs to lie where they fall absent timely memoranda.
17 Feb 2015

NO 317 LIMITED v CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL [2015] NZHC 186

Citation

[2015] NZHC 186
Court

High Court

The Court granted leave and ordered targeted additional discovery: data extracts from the Trip Exceptions and Access databases for January to May 2008 for the plaintiff, RedBus and Leopard, because the material was relevant to ECAN's proposed comparative-performance evidence and proportional to the litigation needs; the application to set aside privilege/remove redactions and to discover a legal advice memorandum was dismissed because privilege was established and issue estoppel precluded relitigation of the earlier privilege ruling.
11 Nov 2014

BODY CORPORATE 172108 v MEADER [2014] NZHC 2794

Citation

[2014] NZHC 2794
Court

High Court

The Body Corporate is ordered to make full disclosure of documents relating to (A) the decision to close in the balconies and associated engineering and consultant advice and communications, and (B) contractors' instructions, variation notices and related consultants' reports, because those documents are relevant to assessing whether the variations are within the Scheme (remediation) or are betterment and thus affect MSL's liability. The Body Corporate is not required to disclose the fifth amended statement of claim or the settlement documentation with Auckland Council (items C and D) because…
13 Sept 2013

AUC PROPERTIES LIMITED v ROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL [2013] NZHC 2395

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2395
Court

High Court

Where the documents sought are publicly accessible via the defendant's website and the requested electronic searches are complex and disproportionate given the resources and absence of an archival email system, the defendant is not required to undertake further discovery beyond what has been made available; the applicant must search public sources and the court will revisit the issue only if evidence suggests undisclosed relevant documents exist (eg committee minutes indicating excluded material).