Discovery — tailored discovery — contractual dispute — District Court Rules 2014 rr 8.2, 8.3, 8.7 — Commerce Commission v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd [2012] NZHC 726 — Nathan's Finance New Zealand Ltd (in receivership) v AIG Insurance New Zealand Ltd [2013] NZHC 3137. The plaintiff sought standard and tailored discovery orders against the defendant following a contractual dispute where it was alleged that the defendant underpaid for work completed under the contract and had failed to provide particular work ,that under the contract, should have been given to the plaintiff. The tailored discovery orders pertained to the defendant's bank statements, particular site work, the defendant's invoices, their tender documents, their calculations for determining amounts owing, and the defendant's financial accounts (advertising for new work). Rule 8.7 of the District Court Rules governs discovery. The Judge examined each of the plaintiff's claims in light of the rules and case law and, with the exception of the second category (particular site work), found all claims were unsuccessful. The Judge noted that the discovery cannot be a "fishing expedition" and that the documents sought must be relevant. On the claim of particular work, the plaintiff was partially successful as the plaintiff could provide some evidence that the defendant may have been carrying out work that the contract provided for the plaintiff. However the scope of the claim was too broad and was limited by the Judge. Judgment Date: 12 February 2019.