17 Dec 2007
TOHENGAROA AND GEOFFREY JOHN HOGAN V MERILYN RUTH CONNOLLY AND ORS HC HAM CIV 2006-419-000968
- Citation
- openlaw-38fa07ab_1d18_45e0_b868_c07cd0424a78.pdf
- Court
- High Court
Documents concerning training and supervision of the first defendant were not relevant to the pleaded claims against the second defendants (which focus on administration of the trusts and vicarious liability), and ordering their production as potential similar fact evidence would be oppressive; the Associate Judge's determination refusing production of those documents was correct and the review is dismissed.