Confidential arbitration

2022-11-09T02:06:42+00:00

Acting for the successful respondents in an arbitration regarding the validity of the expulsion of a partner from a firm.  Issues included validity of the expulsion (interpretation of termination provisions, repudiation) and significant legal issues and expert evidence regarding quantum (future profits, valuation).  Seven day arbitral hearing.

Bayly v Hicks

2022-11-09T02:10:20+00:00

Counsel for the respondents in the leading case on partition under the Property Law Act 2007. This involved extensive expert evidence on valuation, surveying and planning issues, with several hearings in the High Court and the Court of Appeal over 7 years: 7 day hearing in the High Court, 2011, reported at (2011) 13 NZCPR 568; Court of Appeal, 2012, reported at [2013] 2 NZLR 401; three day hearing in the High Court, 2015, following appointment of Court-appointed valuers and surveyors; resolved after Court of Appeal hearing was adjourned part-heard, 2016.

Justitiae Trustee Company Limited v NZF Nominees Limited

2023-10-30T23:44:56+00:00

Counsel for a respondent on a trust dispute.  Successful in High Court ([2021] NZHC 659) and awarded increased costs with indemnity ([2021] NZHC 1585).  Also successful in opposition to set aside statutory demand based on the costs award (reported at [2022] NZCCLR 10).

Wendco v Wiri Licensing Trust and Auckland Council

2022-11-09T02:10:11+00:00

Counsel for the Wiri Licensing Trust (junior to Graham Kohler QC) on a significant dispute with its tenant, the operator of Wendy’s New Zealand. We successfully opposed two applications for interim injunction in lease dispute (2014). I also acted on the opposition to an application for judicial review regarding non-notification of resource consent application which went to the Supreme Court: High Court, 2014; Court of Appeal, 2015, (2015) 19 ELRNZ 328; and Supreme Court, 2016, [2017] 1 NZLR 1008.

Marr v Parkin

2020-07-06T05:17:25+00:00

Counsel for the defendant on a High Court claim relating to purchase of a residential property (four day trial), with judgment for the defendant upheld on appeal. The issues included agency, knowing receipt, competing equitable priorities and the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act. The Court awarded increased costs in relation to the proceeding and a related caveat matter: High Court, 2014; Court of Appeal, 2015; High Court costs judgment, 2015. In a separate proceeding between the same parties, the High Court made an order for possession of the property on summary basis (2015).

Go to Top