Blomfield v Slater

[2018] NZHC 1101

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2013-404-5218

[2018] NZHC 1101

BETWEEN

MATTHEW JOHN BLOMFIELD

Plaintiff

AND

CAMERON JOHN SLATER

Defendant

Hearing:	15 May 2018
Appearances:	F Geiringer for Plaintiff Defendant in person
Judgment:	18 May 2018

JUDGMENT OF LANG J

[on interlocutory issues]

This judgment was delivered by me on 18 May 2018 at 3.30 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date……………

BLOMFIELD v SLATER (3) [2018] NZHC 1101 [18 May 2018]

[1]                 In this proceeding Mr Blomfield sues Mr Slater in defamation. The claims relate to allegedly defamatory remarks Mr Slater made about Mr Blomfield in blogs posted on a website commonly known as Whaleoil.1

[2]                 The proceeding was commenced in the District Court in 2012. It was subsequently transferred to this Court in 2013. It is due to be the subject of a trial of four weeks duration before a Judge sitting without a jury in October 2018.

[3]                 The purpose of this judgment is to deal with four outstanding interlocutory matters. They are:

(i)The costs categorisation of the proceeding.

(ii)The fixing of costs on applications by Mr Blomfield for orders adding a second defendant and requiring the plaintiff to provide further and better particulars.

(iii)An application by Mr Blomfield for the trial to proceed in two stages.

(iv)An application by Mr Slater for an order requiring Mr Blomfield to provide security for Mr Slater’s costs.

(v)An application by Mr Blomfield for “unless orders” to compel compliance by Mr Slater with directions for discovery.

The costs categorisation of the proceeding

[4]                 It is difficult to ascertain from the file whether any formal order has been made allocating a costs categorisation to this proceeding. At least one earlier judgment has proceeded, however, on the basis that this is a Category 2 proceeding for costs purposes.2

1      Whale Oil Beef Hooked < v Blomfield [2014] NZHC 3272 at [19].

[5]                 I take the view that the proceeding should remain a Category 2 proceeding at least until trial. It will be for the trial Judge to determine whether it should be re- categorised as a Category 3 proceeding for the purposes of preparation for trial and the trial itself.

Costs in relation to applications by Mr Blomfield for further and better particulars and joinder of second defendant

[6]                 In late 2017 Mr Blomfield applied for an order joining the second defendant, Social Media Consultants Limited, as a party to the proceeding. He took this step after Mr Slater pointed out that the publications forming the basis of Mr Blomfield’s claims are posted on a website operated by that company. It was therefore necessary for the company to be joined as a party.

[7]                 Mr Blomfield also applied for an order requiring Mr Slater to provide further and better particulars  of  his  defences.  This  followed  correspondence  between  Mr Blomfield’s solicitors and Mr Slater during November 2017.

[8]                 Both applications were  called  before  Brewer  J…