New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Trial management

Legal area

Court

28 Apr 2023

PURUCKER v HUEBLER & ANOR [2023] NZHC 981

Citation

[2023] NZHC 981
Court

High Court

The court refused to appoint a court expert and denied the adjournment because the application was last-minute in proceedings that commenced in 2018, the applicant (a bookkeeper) had the capacity and time to prepare or brief expert evidence, appointment would necessitate adjourning the trial causing prejudice and delay to the plaintiff, the appointment was unlikely to resolve the central issue of alleged misappropriation (and the applicant would not be bound by an adverse expert), and practical accommodations (couriering documents and inclusion in the common bundle) address access concerns; a…
15 Mar 2023

HELLABY RESOURCE SERVICES LTD v BODY CORPORATE 197281 [2023] NZHC 513

Citation

[2023] NZHC 513
Court

High Court

The application to recall was dismissed because the consent direction allowing the Body Corporate to file amended pleadings is the operative direction, paragraph [27] was an obiter observation not a factual error amenable to correction under the slip rule, and the stringent Horowhenua test for recalling a final judgment was not satisfied.
28 Feb 2023

METLIFECARE RETIREMENT VILLAGES LTD v JAMES HARDIE NEW ZEALAND LTD [2023] NZHC 333

Citation

[2023] NZHC 333
Court

High Court

Given the size, complexity and predominant reliance on expert evidence, the judge exercised rule 9.46 and case management powers under the High Court Rules to order grouping of expert evidence into specified topic groups because grouping would assist the Court, was permitted by the rules, did not cause irremediable prejudice, and preserved parties' ability to control the order of their witnesses within groups, with sequencing of groups to be agreed by counsel or returned to the Court if necessary.
11 Jul 2022

IAG NEW ZEALAND LIMITED v KIRK ROBERTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS LIMITED [2022] NZHC 1628

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1628
Court

High Court

The application for a separate preliminary determination was dismissed because defendants objected to the proposed split hearing, the allocated judge's availability and registrar support made a two-stage hearing impractical, and the proceeding could not be accommodated as proposed; consequently the scheduled hearing was vacated and costs were to follow the event on a 2B basis unless memoranda were filed.
20 Dec 2021

THE BAKER IP TRUST v DIVING SERVICES NZ LTD [2021] NZHC 3567

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3567
Court

High Court

The proceeding must proceed to a full trial on both liability and quantum because hearing the matter in its entirety is more efficient and avoids the prospect of delay if the plaintiff succeeds on liability.
21 May 2021

THE NZ GUARDIAN TRUST CO LTD v IAN CHARLES EASTON [2021] NZCA 205

Citation

[2021] NZCA 205
Court

Court of Appeal

The application for a stay was dismissed because the trial Judge was correct to refuse leave and this Court was not satisfied leave was likely nor that the harm from disclosure could not be remedied on appeal; the balance of convenience favoured continuation of the substantially completed trial and appellate interference with trial management was not justified.
21 May 2020

CAPITAL AND COAST DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD v BECA CARTER HOLLINGS & FERNER LTD [2020] NZHC 1083

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1083
Court

High Court

Adjournment granted only for a limited period (four weeks to 12 October 2020) because (a) the interests of justice and efficient use of court resources require avoiding loss of a fixed 10-week trial slot where possible, (b) the plaintiff's late briefs and discovery caused delay but the stagnation causation theory was already within the scope of the litigation and defendants' experts had previously inspected the site, (c) parties are well resourced and alternative measures and remote technology can mitigate COVID-19 travel restrictions, and (d) a short adjournment balances fairness to defendan…
13 Sept 2019

HOUGHTON v SAUNDERS [2019] NZHC 2318

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2318
Court

High Court

The Court refused a stay of the order requiring individual pleadings for claimants (but deferred the deadline until the day after the Court of Appeal delivers its results to avoid rendering the appeal nugatory), granted a temporary stay of the order requiring further discovery affidavits until the Court of Appeal results (with a requirement to comply within eight working days if the appeal fails), refused to stay security for costs orders, directed claimants to elect approximately 15 claimants by 20 September 2019, gave defendants three working days after service of pleadings/discovery to obj…
6 Aug 2019

R v TIHEMA & ORS [2019] NZHC 1899

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1899
Court

High Court

The application for severance was refused; the judge concluded a joint trial of the three defendants is necessary and appropriate and reserved full reasons to be delivered subsequently.
19 Dec 2017

MASONRY DESIGN SOLUTIONS LTD v APPLEBY HOLDINGS LTD [2017] NZHC 3247

Citation

[2017] NZHC 3247
Court

High Court

The judge exercised discretion to prioritize efficiency in ordering the cases to be tried together; because both parties had good arguments and neither acted unreasonably and the respondent only lost a limited tactical advantage, the appropriate exercise of discretion was to let costs lie where they fall.