New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Scope of retainer

Legal area

Court

1 Nov 2021

BCH INVESTMENTS LIMITED v NGUY [2021] NZHC 2932

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2932
Court

High Court

The engagement encompassed all matters incidental to the Gills Road development including OIO consent; defendant breached his retainer and duty of care by failing to ascertain and advise that the land was sensitive and that OIO consent was required; the plaintiff reasonably mitigated loss by pursuing retrospective consent and ex turpi causa did not bar recovery because BCH did not deliberately breach the OIA and the defendant's breach was the operative cause of the losses; judgment for plaintiff for NZD 873661.55.
24 Oct 2019

WHITE v ALLEN [2019] NZHC 2717

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2717
Court

High Court

Plaintiff failed to prove the key factual assertions that the GRT signed the 3B1 agreement with clause 6 intact and that clause 6 was deleted afterwards by the vendor; the court found Madeg's signed version already had clause 6 deleted. The defendant's retainer remained in force but was limited by late instructions received on 9 November 2011; trustees instructed urgent settlement, understood building issues and waived delay to inspect s147 certificates. Consequently there was no breach by the solicitor that caused recoverable loss; the plaintiff's claims accordingly fail.
28 Mar 2019

JOHNSON v CANTERBURY/WESTLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 3 [2019] NZHC 619

Citation

[2019] NZHC 619
Court

High Court

The High Court affirmed the Tribunal: given the referral circumstances, the retainer extended beyond conveyancing mechanics to include ensuring trustees understood their duties and conflicts; the solicitor's failures amounted to negligence of a degree bringing the profession into disrepute ('high-end' negligence); multiple and prolonged trust-account breaches, including false monthly certificates, amounted to misconduct; cumulative consideration of all conduct justified suspension for three months and costs.
23 Nov 2017

COLLINS & MAY LAW v MEMELINK & PATRICK JOHN RENSHAW AS TRUSTEES OF THE LINK TRUST (NO. 1) & ANOR [2017] NZCA 541

Citation

[2017] NZCA 541
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the retainer was limited to effecting settlement; the settlement statement together with withdrawal of caveats and registration of transfer constituted sufficient record that payment of the lesser sum discharged the purchaser’s obligations, and the trustees’ loss was caused by the client’s failure to produce Ms Matthews' written acknowledgement rather than by any negligence of Collins & May Law.
12 Dec 2016

ESTATE OF JUDITH CLAIRE HAMPSON [2016] NZHC 3016

Citation

[2016] NZHC 3016
Court

High Court

Given the known seismic risk, available estate funds, and the scope of the solicitor's retainer to administer the estate, the trustee (via the solicitor) had a duty to maintain insurance; failure to renew the policy constituted a breach causing a proven loss of $205,000, wasted costs of $5,205.95 were reasonably incurred to remove the trustee, and the solicitor is liable to indemnify the co-executor for any liability arising from the absence of insurance.
15 Jun 2016

ANTHONY PRATT KAYE AND MORVA KAYE v NORRIS WARD MCKINNON [2016] NZSC 66

Citation

[2016] NZSC 66
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal was essentially factual, raised no question of public or general importance, and both the High Court and Court of Appeal made concurrent factual findings — in particular that any negligence did not causally result in loss and that the retainer did not encompass the services complained of — such that no miscarriage of justice was shown and no proper basis for further appeal existed.
16 May 2016

ANTONS TRAWLING LTD v DAWSON & ASSOCIATES LTD [2016] NZHC 982

Citation

[2016] NZHC 982
Court

High Court

Although Dawson & Associates breached the duty of care by failing to identify and advise the client about the materially disadvantageous change to the mortgage clause in Annex 3, any cause of action based on that failure accrued when Annex 3 was signed (July 2008) and is therefore statute-barred under the six‑year limitation; the defendant's advice and release of funds in October 2008 were not negligent because funds were disbursed under a joint remittance authority and there was no clear legal basis to retain them, so the plaintiff's claim fails in its entirety.
7 Apr 2016

TERRACEDALE DEVELOPMENTS LTD v CAVELL LEITCH PRINGLE & BOYLE [2016] NZHC 605 [7 April 2016]

Citation

[2016] NZHC 605
Court

High Court

The court held the solicitor-client relationship was a general conveyancing retainer; the defendant breached its duty by failing to raise and investigate the water consents which were material to the land's rural utility; breach caused quantifiable loss and both contract and tort claims succeed, but plaintiff contributed to the loss so damages are reduced by 50%.
15 Mar 2016

MEMELINK v COLLINS & MAY LAW [2016] NZHC 442

Citation

[2016] NZHC 442
Court

High Court

Collins & May were negligent and in breach of their retainer by accepting and relying on an inadequate settlement statement without obtaining or preparing a clear written record that payment on settlement fully and finally discharged the Trust's personal covenant to pay the stated purchase price; that negligence caused the Trust's loss of $155,715.33 and retainer limitation did not absolve that duty.
12 Feb 2014

SAMUEL AND SAMUEL (discontinued) v ANNAN LAW & ANOR [2014] NZHC 128

Citation

[2014] NZHC 128
Court

High Court

Macalister Mazengarb (through Mr Buxton) owed a general retainer and was negligent in failing to advise the Samuels, on the information available by mid‑July 2006, that they should consider cancelling the Blue Chip agreement; on the balance of probabilities the Samuels would have sought cancellation and Blue Chip would have allowed it, so the breach caused the loss (loss of chance); liability is apportioned 50:50 between Macalister Mazengarb and Annan Law under s 17 Law Reform Act 1936.