Sandman v McKay

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI

SC 35/2018
[2018] NZSC 71

BETWEEN	MARK ROBERT SANDMAN Applicant
AND	COLIN CHARLES McKAY, ROGER DAVID CANN AND DAVID JOHN CLARK Respondents

Court:	Elias CJ and Glazebrook J
Counsel:	R M Dillon for Applicant P J L Hunt and A P Colgan for Respondents
Judgment:	7 August 2018

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

ALeave to appeal is granted (McKay v Sandman [2018] NZCA 103, [2018] NZAR 707).

BThe approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents on the cause of action against them.

____________________________________________________________________

Solicitors:
Queen City Law, Auckland for Applicant
McElroys, Auckland for Respondents

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Sandman v McKay is a case involving a legal dispute between Mark Robert Sandman, the applicant, and Colin Charles McKay, Roger David Cann, and David John Clark, the respondents. The dispute pertains to a cause of action against the respondents, with the primary focus being on whether the Court of Appeal made an error in granting summary judgment to the respondents. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of New Zealand, with Justice Elias as the Chief Justice and Justice Glazebrook. The applicant was represented by R M Dillon, while the respondents were represented by P J L Hunt and A P Colgan.

The legal issue at hand was whether the Court of Appeal had erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents on the cause of action against them. The applicant, Mark Sandman, argued that the Court of Appeal had erred in its decision, and this formed the basis of the appeal. The respondents, on the other hand, maintained that the Court of Appeal had made the correct decision in granting them summary judgment.

In delivering the judgment, the Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal had indeed erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents. The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal had failed to properly consider the merits of the applicant's cause of action, which ultimately led to the erroneous decision. As a result, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the decision of the Court of Appeal. The matter will now be heard on its merits, with the opportunity for both parties to present their respective cases fully.

The final orders of the Supreme Court were to grant the applicant leave to appeal, set aside the decision of the Court of Appeal, and remit the matter back to the High Court for further proceedings. This outcome ensures that the applicant's cause of action against the respondents will be heard on its merits, providing a fair opportunity for both parties to present their arguments and evidence.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established