district court logo

Cartwright v Reid [2021] NZDC 23949

Published 07 March 2022

Reserved judgment — jurisdiction of Court — trespass — permanent encroachment — application for split trial — water damage — access to neighbouring property — Property Law Act 2007, ss 319 & 320 — District Court Rules 2014, r 10.21 — High Court Rules 2016, r 10.15 — Duncan v Taylor (2011) 12 NZCPR 235 — Barry Park Investments Ltd v Johnson [2019] NZCA 686 — Windsor Refrigerator Co v Branch Nominees [1961] 1 CH 375 — Hayden v Attorney General HC Wellington CIV 2-10-485-2380, November 2011 — Karem v Fairfax New Zealand Limited [2012] NZHC 1331. The applicants had suffered water damage to their home as the result of a leaking wall. To fix the wall they needed to arrange access to the neighbouring property, belonging to the respondents. The parties had failed to reach an agreement on the terms of access, and the applicants sought orders from the Court granting them entry onto the respondents' property. The respondents opposed the application, submitting that the Court lacked the jurisdiction to grant some of the conditions of entry sought by the applicants. The applicants therefore asked for the issue of jurisdiction to be determined separately from the substantive issues of the application (a "split trial"). They argued that if the Court were to decide that it had no jurisdiction, this would avoid the need for a lengthy hearing to determine the substantive issues. The Court found that the issues raised by the respondents could not be easily separated from those raised by the applicants. Further, were the Court to decide that it did after all have jurisdiction to hear the case, this could mean that certain witnesses would have to return to give evidence at the substantive trial. On the other hand were the Court to decide against the applicants, this could lead to an appeal further prolonging the dispute; and finally, to schedule a separate trial would be an inefficient use of judicial resources, which were already under pressure from disruptions caused by COVID-19-related shutdowns. The application was dismissed. Judgment Date: 23 December 2021.

Tags