New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Third party discovery

Legal area

Court

23 Mar 2023

TARR v ALLISON [2023] NZHC 601

Citation

[2023] NZHC 601
Court

High Court

Court ordered discovery of correspondence (1 July 2019–26 Oct 2020), landline call records for same period, deceased's medical records 26 Oct 2017–26 Oct 2020, bank statements from 29 June 2019 to present, directed executor to publish a will notice in the Law Society newsletter for one month and to seek files from solicitor Gulley (with third‑party discovery if refused); declined order requiring full accounting of beneficiaries' finances at date of death; granted in part the beneficiaries' cross-application requiring plaintiff to disclose specified trust documents and evidence of her financia…
31 Mar 2021

HAVEN INSURANCE LIMITED v HEINRICH LOMBARD [2021] NZHC 255

Citation

[2021] NZHC 255
Court

High Court

Plaintiff is entitled to costs and disbursements but scale costs were reduced by 15% to reflect limited success on quantum; expert fees for redundant work were reduced by 50%; costs were allocated 80% to Mr Brown, 15% to Mr Miller and JMC (jointly and severally), and 5% to Mr Carr; Mr Brown's 80% share of the scale costs was increased by 50% due to his non-compliance and false affidavits, while indemnity costs were not awarded except that increased costs were appropriate for Brown on the relevant steps.
2 Feb 2021

TELFER ELECTRICAL NELSON LTD v TROTTER & ORS [2021] NZHC 53

Citation

[2021] NZHC 53
Court

High Court

Indemnity costs were not justified on the facts; however, conduct involving unsupported personal allegations and inefficient aspects of the litigation warranted a 25% uplift on scale costs in favour of the successful party; specific cost items such as photocopying were disallowed and costs consequences for third party discovery and certain case management hearings were allocated as set out in the orders.
24 Aug 2020

NZ BRICK DISTRIBUTORS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP v MALKHASIAN [2020] NZHC 2147

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2147
Court

High Court

The High Court allowed the appeal, holding that a non-party responding to a tailored discovery order is entitled to its reasonable costs of compliance; tailored discovery categories usually do not require a secondary relevance filter by the producing non-party; the District Court erred in denying the appellant any costs because the appellant's conduct, while pedantic and disproportionate, was not so egregious as to forfeit entitlement to costs; $10,000 was an appropriate award for reasonable costs of compliance.
18 Sept 2019

GREENBAUM v SOUTHERN CROSS HOSPITALS LIMITED [2019] NZCA 438

Citation

[2019] NZCA 438
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court upheld the High Court's refusal to order disclosure under s69 Evidence Act 2006: on the evidence the public interest in preserving the confidentiality of private hospital credentialling (necessary to secure candid evaluative material and protect patient safety) outweighed the public interest in disclosure in the proceeding; the applicant's waiver and the Privacy Act considerations supported confidentiality; proposed restricted-access alternatives were insufficient to avoid the chilling harm.
30 Jul 2019

BISCUIT CREEK FOREST LIMITED v VALLANCE [2019] NZHC 1814

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1814
Court

High Court

By consent the Court made orders for targeted discovery: plaintiff to particularise its damages claim; defendants to review and discover relevant documents in solicitor files (Gibson Sheat and WCM Legal) with defendants entitled to access WCM Legal files for discovery; an order for third party discovery was made against Eastern NZ Forestry under r 8.21 with the plaintiff to meet Eastern NZ Forestry's reasonable costs; costs between the parties reserved to be dealt with at the conclusion of the proceeding.
20 Dec 2018

REDWOOD GROUP LIMITED v QUEENSTOWN GATEWAY (5M) LIMITED [2018]NZHC 3439

Citation

[2018]NZHC 3439
Court

High Court

Court ordered security for costs of $100,000 payable in three instalments because credible evidence supported inference plaintiff may be unable to meet costs and the balance of merits favoured defendants; refused order requiring individual listing of solicitor-client privileged documents because Rules permit group listing and descriptions sufficient to assess privilege; granted third party discovery against KCM/Kerry Knight as documents were relevant to refinancing offers and defendants' case; refused plaintiff's discovery requests for litigation and solicitor-client privileged documents held…
21 Jun 2016

WHITFORD PROPERTIES LIMITED (in liquidation) v BRUCE & ors [2016] NZHC 1339

Citation

[2016] NZHC 1339
Court

High Court

The court exercised its discretion to indemnify ANZ for its solicitor‑and‑client costs for both the application and compliance because ANZ was an involuntary participant entitled to protect legitimate privacy and the claimed costs were not shown to be unreasonable or duplicative to a degree warranting reduction; the court also ordered costs in favour of the appearing proposed third party.
29 Oct 2013

KYOTO TRUSTEE LIMITED v ANNIK NEW PLYMOUTH LIMITED [2013] NZHC 2849

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2849
Court

High Court

The court ordered the defendants to produce bank statements (1 April 2012–31 December 2012), monthly management accounts for the same period and annual financial statements for year ending 31 March 2013 (if available) relating to the operation of Te Henui Lodge because those primary accounting records were relevant to the plaintiff's damages claim, third party discovery showed the defendants had undisclosed relevant documents, and generalized commercial sensitivity objections did not justify refusal; costs were awarded to the plaintiff on a 2B basis.
3 Aug 2011

JOHN SHEARER ANGLAND V THOMAS ELWIN MOWER HC CHCH CIV-2008-409-001990

Citation

openlaw-7fe03f66_3894_4732_ad54_352014f7189b.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court directed discovery of the documents expressly referenced in discovered materials and ordered production of the defendant's landline and cellphone numbers and call records for the period 1 January 2004 to 27 August 2008 (limited to relevance up to the filing date), required plaintiffs and the first counterclaim defendant to produce company valuation and valuation-related documents but excluded the 2008 John Ryan valuation as confidential mediation material, and ordered reconstruction/disclosure of email logs where practicable; held that control over company documents vested in direct…