Provincial Finance Limited (in rec) v Baycorp Advantage (NZ) Ltd HC Auckland CIV 2006-404-7864

[2007] NZHC 1651

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV 2006-404-007864

BETWEEN  PROVINCIAL FINANCE LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP)

First Plaintiff

AND  CONSUMER CREDIT LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP)

Second Plaintiff

AND  BAYCORP ADVANTAGE (NZ) LIMITED

First Defendant

AND  MARKET ROAD FINANCE LIMITED Second Defendant

AND  ACTIVE FINANCE LIMITED Third Defendant

AND  FINANCE ZONE LIMITED Fourth Defendant

AND  ABDUL KAREEM OSMAN Fifth Defendant

AND  ABUBAKR OSMAN Sixth Defendant

AND  MOHAMMED IMRAN OSMAN Seventh Defendant

AND  MOHAMMED FAROOK OSMAN Eighth Defendant

AND  GATE PA CARS AND COMMERCIALS LIMITED

Ninth Defendant

AND  GOLDEN EAGLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED

Tenth Defendant

PROVINCIAL FINANCE LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP) AND ANOR V BAYCORP ADVANTAGE (NZ) LIMITED AND ORS HC AK CIV 2006-404-007864  22 February 2007

AND  PREMIER HOLDINGS LIMITED Eleventh Defendant

AND  SHAHENSHAH INVESTMENTS LIMITED

Twelfth Defendant

AND  APN NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Applicant

Hearing:         22 February 2007

Appearances: M Arthur for Plaintiffs

M Heard for 5th to 12th Defendants

Ms W D Duggan for Applicant

Judgment:      22 February 2007

ORAL JUDGMENT OF VENNING J

Solicitors:           Chapman Tripp, PO Box 2206, Auckland

Phillips Fox, PO Box 160, Auckland
Lee Salmon Long, PO Box 2026, Shortland Street, Auckland
Izard Weston, PO Box 5348, Welington 6040

Bell Gully, PO Box 4199, Auckland (W D Duggan)

2

[1]      APN  New  Zealand  Limited  seeks  an  order  from  the  Court  reviewing  a decision of the Registrar declining them leave to search, inspect and copy the Court file or parts of the Court file in this proceeding.

[2]      This issue has been before the Court before on the application by another media entity.  After hearing argument on that matter Harrison J on 31 January 2007 granted leave to Mr Stock, a reporter employed by the Sunday Star Times, to inspect and take a copy of the statement of claim, statement of defence and interlocutory applications filed by the defendants.  The Judge imposed an embargo on the access time.

[3]      Matters have moved on in these proceedings since then.   But there still are matters of proper concern to the plaintiffs and also to the defendants as to the extent of evidence on the file and  matters contained  in affidavits.    However,  balanced against that  is of course the principle of open  justice.    In  light  of Harrison J’s decision  there  is  no  principled  basis  on  which  to  restrict  media  access  to  the pleadings and current interlocutory applications filed.

[4]      The only remaining issue is the access to interlocutory applications that may be filed in the future.  I propose to deal with that by providing in this decision that they will prima facie be available for inspection but that there be an embargo of three working days after they are filed before they may be accessed by the media, to enable  any  party that  may  be  concerned  about  the  content  of  the  interlocutory application to seek a confidentiality order from the Court.

Decision

[5]      The decision of the Court therefore is that the application is granted to the extent  that  the  applicant  APN  New  Zealand  Limited  may  have  access  to  the pleadings on the file by inspecting and taking a copy of the statement of claim, statement of defence, and amended statements of claim and defence filed from time

to time in this proceeding.   They may also have access to the interlocutory applications currently filed on the proceeding.    That  access  does  not  extend  to evidence filed in support of the interlocutory applications or evidence filed generally by way of affidavits.

[6]      The applicant may also have access to the file for the purposes of inspecting and copying any future interlocutory applications provided that such inspection and copying shall not occur for a period of three days after any particular interlocutory application is filed.

[7]      Although this application has been made by APN New Zealand Limited and the orders are made formally in its favour I indicate that it is the intention of the Court that access on the similar terms be made available to all representatives of any accredited media in the future so that there should be no further need for formal applications to be made through the Registrar in relation to searching the file.

[8]      In addition to access to the interlocutory application the applicant and other media may have access to the fifth to 12th defendants request for further particulars.

[9]      The media may of course have access to both this minute and Harrison J’s minutes.

Venning J