Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
High Court of New Zealand Decisions |
Last Updated: 18 November 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY
CIV-2015-409-000672 [2016] NZHC 2723
BETWEEN
|
EMMA JOY STEEL AND SARAH
NANCY OTT (AS TRUSTEES OF THE NINFIELD TRUST)
Plaintiffs
|
AND
|
SPENCE CONSULTANTS LIMITED First Defendant
GARY BRENT SPENCE Second Defendant
|
Hearing:
|
14 November 2016
|
Appearances:
|
G A Cooper and S Cowan for Plaintiffs
H C Matthews and K Graham for Defendants
|
Ruling:
|
14 November 2016
|
ORAL RULING (1) OF GENDALL
J
STEEL v SPENCE CONSULTANTS LIMITED [2016] NZHC 2723 [14 November 2016]
[1] First of all, so far as the question you have raised, Mr Matthews,
as to Mr Spence’s personal liability here, you
have had an answer from Mr
Cooper. That remains a matter which will unfold as this hearing
progresses.
[2] Secondly, so far as the appropriateness and admissibility of
documents in the agreed bundle are concerned, first, the documents
at pages 368
and 369 have been agreed by Mr Cooper to be deleted and I have made a deletion
of those documents.
[3] Next, the documents at pages 419 and 420, this is the
estimate which Ms Steel received from P4 Projects. I
note that Ms Steel, who
is the first-named plaintiff, is giving evidence in this matter. This is an
estimate which has been received
by Ms Steel. I accept the arguments from Mr
Matthews that, given no one from P4 Projects is to be called to give evidence as
to
the technical nature and authenticity of the calculations contained in this
estimate I am ruling at this point that this estimate,
pages 419 and 420, are
also to be deleted from the agreed bundle. What may transpire, however, when Ms
Steel provides her evidence
in this matter is something I will address at the
time the evidence is given in terms of any admissibility questions raised at
that
point.
[4] The next documents are at 375 and 376 of the agreed
bundle. But as
Mr Cooper before me has said, those documents (which relate to an appraisal
for
36A Brookside Terrace completed by the real estate agent Julia Ashmore Smith)
are now superseded by a one page document, which he
has handed up to me. This
is somewhat different from aspects of those earlier pages. Ms Ashmore Smith,
as I understand it, is
not being called as a witness here. Mr Matthews
has rightly indicated that this document is simply hearsay at this point
and,
certainly insofar as it purports to provide an expert opinion relating to
information contained in the document, it is inadmissible.
So that document,
which is now at page 375 of the agreed bundle, is to be deleted from the agreed
bundle.
[5] The last document is at page 373 of the agreed bundle. This is a
letter from
Build Tech Restorations Limited addressed to Ms Emma Steel dated 19
September
2014. Again, Mr Matthews for the defendant objects to this letter being included in the bundle on the basis that it is hearsay, given that Mr Boddington, the construction
manager of Build Tech Restorations Limited and author of the letter, is not
to give evidence in this matter. Again it is a little
difficult at this early
point in this hearing to ascertain from the body of the letter, aspects which
might be at issue here and
which this letter addresses. Again, it is a letter
addressed to Ms Emma Steel. She is, as I have said earlier, the first-named
plaintiff
and a party who is to give evidence in this matter. My ruling at this
point is that the document is inadmissible. It is hearsay
in this matter. What
may transpire when Ms Emma Steel gives her evidence in this matter on any issues
which this letter might purport
to address I will deal with at that point in
time.
[6] Those are my rulings with respect to those issues. I have deleted
from the bundle therefore the particular pages that
I have mentioned in the
decision I have just given.
...................................................
Gendall J
Solicitors:
Cavell Leitch, Christchurch
White Fox & Jones, Christchurch
NZLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZHC/2016/2723.html