Deng v Zheng

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI

SC 5/2021
[2021] NZSC 43

BETWEEN	DONGLIN DENG Applicant
AND	LU ZHENG Respondent

Court:	O’Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Counsel:	J D Turner and L X Huang for Applicant D Zhang and E Tie for Respondent
Judgment:	14 May 2021

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

ALeave to appeal is granted (Zheng v Deng [2020] NZCA 614).

BThe approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to make a declaration that there was a partnership between Mr Zheng and Mr Deng in which they were equal partners and to make orders that were consequential on that finding.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

The appeal raises potential issues about the interpretation of documents translated from Mandarin and the cultural setting in an arrangement between two Chinese parties whose business relationship appears to have been conducted in Mandarin. The Court of Appeal noted that it was conscious that language is used in a broader linguistic and cultural setting, by reference to background assumptions about personal and business relationships and the ways in which dealings are normally structured, that were shared by the parties, but which the Court may not be aware of or understand.[1] The Court referred to the need to be sensitive to the social and cultural context and to be cautious about drawing inferences based on preconceptions about business dealings.[2]
[1]Zheng v Deng [2020] NZCA 614 (Goddard, Duffy and Nation JJ) at [88].
[2]At [89].
It may be necessary for this Court to explore these factors in order to resolve the appeal. Accordingly, we invite the New Zealand Law Society | Te Kāhui Ture o Aotearoa (the Law Society) to consider intervening in this appeal, after consultation with NZ Asian Lawyers. We direct the Registrar to bring the appeal to the attention of the Law Society and NZ Asian Lawyers and provide them with a copy of this judgment.
We note that Orient Construction Ltd and Orient Homes Ltd were parties to the appeal in the Court of Appeal. Neither is named in the notice of application for leave or the submissions filed by the parties. Counsel should confer and advise the Court within seven days whether, in light of the question on which leave has been given, either or both of those companies ought to be parties to the appeal to this Court.

Solicitors:
McVeagh Fleming, Auckland for Applicant
Advent Ark Lawyers, Auckland for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New Zealand, the case of Donglin Deng v Lu Zheng revolved around a dispute about the existence of a partnership between the two parties, with Deng seeking leave to appeal against a Court of Appeal ruling that established an equal partnership between Zheng and Deng. The case was heard by O’Regan, Ellen France, and Williams JJ, with J D Turner and L X Huang representing Deng, and D Zhang and E Tie representing Zheng. The court granted leave to appeal and approved a question concerning whether the Court of Appeal correctly declared the existence of a partnership between Zheng and Deng and made orders based on this finding.

The central legal issue in this case was the interpretation of documents translated from Mandarin, and the cultural context of the business relationship between Zheng and Deng. The Court of Appeal had acknowledged the importance of considering the broader linguistic and cultural setting in which the parties operated, and their shared background assumptions about personal and business relationships. The Court of Appeal noted the necessity to be sensitive to the social and cultural context and to avoid drawing inferences based on preconceptions about business dealings. The Supreme Court recognised the potential need to explore these factors further in order to resolve the appeal.

In granting leave to appeal, the Supreme Court invited the New Zealand Law Society and NZ Asian Lawyers to consider intervening in the appeal, after consulting with each other. The court directed the Registrar to bring the appeal to the attention of the Law Society and NZ Asian Lawyers and provide them with a copy of the judgment. Additionally, the court requested that counsel confer and advise the court within seven days whether Orient Construction Ltd and Orient Homes Ltd, which were parties to the appeal in the Court of Appeal, should be included as parties to the appeal to the Supreme Court.

No final orders have been made as of yet, pending the further exploration of the cultural and linguistic context of the partnership between Zheng and Deng. The Supreme Court's decision to grant leave to appeal and invite the Law Society and NZ Asian Lawyers to intervene in the case highlights the importance of understanding the cultural and linguistic factors that may influence the interpretation of agreements between parties from diverse backgrounds.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established