Civil litigation results

Our Cases

Access to justice and efficiency key to representative (class action) orders: Cridge v Studorp Limited [2017] NZCA 376

Leaky building owners can now join the class action against James Hardie under a five month “opt-in period” granted by the Court of Appeal in Cridge v Studorp Limited [2017] NZCA 376. The Court of Appeal found that issues of duty, breach of duty and Fair Trading Act breach were sufficiently common to all owners to justify a representative or class action. Therefore, the claim had been properly brought as a representative case, stopping time “permanently” for limitation purposes for both the named plaintiffs and represented class members. The later coming into force of the 15-year limitation period under the Limitation Act was not a reason to limit the opt in period. Parker & Associates acted for the successful owners. *Stuart Dalzell, Partner, discusses the decision

Leaky home purchasers succeed in misrepresentation claim against Vendors: Mason v Magee

Parker & Associates acted for the successful plaintiff purchasers, Mr and Mrs Mason, in Mason v Magee [2017] NZHC 51. The decision is an important one for both buyers and sellers of 'leaky homes'.

Body Corporate 90247 v Manfrini Limited (2014) NZHC 295

Costs were reserved in the 27 February 2014 leaky building judgment Body Corporate 90247 v Wellington City Council, in which Ronald Young J awarded our homeowner clients approximately $1.9 million against the Wellington City Council due to the Council's negligence in undertaking inspections and issuing code compliance certificates.

Body Corporate 90247 v Manfrini Limited (2014) NZHC 295

Parker & Associates acted for the successful body corporate and owners of four units at 14C Glenmore Street, Thorndon, Wellington (Glenmore) in their claim against Wellington City Council (the Council) for negligent inspection and issue of Code Compliance Certificates (CCC).

Court grants the Kiwifruit Claim leave to proceed with representative action with a litigation funder

Parker & Associates acts for the kiwifruit growers and the post-harvest operator, Seeka Kiwifruit Industries Limited, in their claim against the Attorney-General (on behalf of the Ministry for Primary Industries), which alleges that employees of MAF (now MPI) were negligent in carrying out biosecurity functions leading to the outbreak of the virulent form of the bacteria Pseudomonas syringae pv actinidiae (known as Psa-V) into New Zealand in 2010 and resulting losses.

Body Corporate 85978 v Wellington City Council & Ors [2015] NZHC 2852 (St Paul's Apartments)

Parker & Associates acted for the successful appellants in Body Corporate 85978 v WCC [2013] NZHC 2852 (Dobson J), where the High Court allowed an appeal which could have resulted in up to one third of the owners of a Wellington apartment complex being time-barred from the proceedings.

Brandlines v Central Forklift Group Limited (2013)

Successful defence of a $10 million negligence claim against our client, a forklift company, which was being blamed for a large warehouse fire. In the course of a lengthy defended High Court hearing the plaintiffs discontinued their claims against our client.