Lambie Trustee Ltd v Addleman

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI

SC 118/2019
[2020] NZSC 14

BETWEEN	LAMBIE TRUSTEE LIMITED Applicant
AND	PRUDENCE ANNE ADDLEMAN Respondent

Court:	Glazebrook, O’Regan and Ellen France JJ
Counsel:	D A T Chambers QC for Applicant A S Ross QC and R A Rose for Respondent
Judgment:	4 March 2020

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

ALeave to appeal is granted on whether the Court of Appeal was correct to order the applicant to disclose to the respondent any legal opinions and other advice obtained by the trustees of the Lambie Trust and funded by the Trust (Addleman v Lambie Trustee Ltd [2019] NZCA 480, (2019) 5 NZTR ¶29-016).

BThe approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to reject the applicant’s claims of legal advice privilege and litigation privilege respectively.

CIn all other respects, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

We do not consider the criteria for the grant of leave to appeal are met in relation to the orders to disclose financial statements and minutes of meetings (subject to any necessary redactions).[1] The Court of Appeal’s decision in relation to those documents was an application of this Court’s recent decision in Erceg v Erceg and there is no reason for us to revisit that decision.[2] Nor do we see any appearance of miscarriage in relation to those aspects of the Court of Appeal’s decision.
[1]Senior Courts Act 2016, s 74.
[2]Erceg v Erceg [2017] NZSC 28, [2017] 1 NZLR 320.
We ask counsel for the applicant to include in her submissions to the Court such general information about the nature of the legal opinions and other advice as possible, so that the Court has a proper context in which to consider the privilege issues. For the avoidance of doubt, we confirm the Court does not seek to view the documents themselves. The hearing will be confined to issues of principle only.

Solicitors:
Kemps Weir Lawyers, Auckland for Applicant
Bell Gully, Auckland for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lambie Trustee Limited applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of New Zealand against a decision of the Court of Appeal that ordered the disclosure of legal advice obtained by the trustees of the Lambie Trust and funded by the Trust to Prudence Anne Addleman. The Court of Appeal had found that the legal advice and litigation privilege did not apply to the documents in question. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal on the specific issue of whether the Court of Appeal was correct in rejecting the claims of legal advice privilege and litigation privilege. The appeal was dismissed in all other respects.

The central legal issue before the Supreme Court was whether the Court of Appeal correctly rejected the applicant's claims of legal advice privilege and litigation privilege regarding the disclosure of the legal opinions and advice obtained and funded by the trustees of the Lambie Trust. The Court was required to determine if the Court of Appeal properly applied the principles governing legal advice privilege and litigation privilege in reaching its decision.

The Supreme Court clarified that it did not consider the criteria for the grant of leave to appeal were met in relation to the orders to disclose financial statements and minutes of meetings, subject to any necessary redactions. The Court noted that the Court of Appeal's decision in relation to these documents was an application of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Erceg v Erceg and saw no reason to revisit that decision. The Court did not find any appearance of a miscarriage of justice in relation to those aspects of the Court of Appeal's decision. The Supreme Court requested the applicant's counsel to include as much general information about the nature of the legal opinions and advice as possible, to provide context for considering the privilege issues. The Court confirmed it did not seek to view the documents themselves and that the hearing would be confined to issues of principle only.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established