Todd Petroleum Mining Company Limited v Shell (Petroleum Mining Company) Limited HC Wellington

[2005] NZHC 1737

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CIV-2005-485-819

BETWEEN

TODD PETROLEUM MINING

COMPANY LIMITED

Plaintiff

AND

SHELL (PETROLEUM MINING COMPANY) LIMITED & ORS

Defendants

Hearing:         29 April 2005

Appearances:  J B M Smith and J A Kean for Plaintiffs P R Jagos and B A Davies for Defendants T C Stephens for Third Defendant

Judgment:      29 April 2005

FURTHER JUDGMENT OF GODDARD

re: Application for recall of judgment delivered 28 April 2005

[1]    The plaintiff seeks recall of that part of my judgment relating to order (5). The circumstances under which an order may properly be recalled after it has been perfected were settled by Wild CJ in Horowhenua County v Nash (No 2) [1968] NZLR 632. The relevant circumstance for present purposes is whether some very special reason presents dictating that justice requires the judgment to be recalled.

[2]    Having heard the submissions of counsel, I have concluded that there are very special reasons why the interests of justice require recall and the deletion of order (5) from the judgment.

[3]My reasons are as follows:

TODD v SHELL & ORS HC WN CIV-2005-485-819 [29 April 2005]

a)The hearing into this matter was conducted under extremely exigent circumstances and the judgment had necessarily to be considered and issued at a very late hour.

b)As a result of the exigency of the hearing, a genuine misapprehension between the Court and counsel for the plaintiff occurred as to whether order (5) was accepted or objected to by the plaintiff and whether it related to all causes of action or only to the fifth cause of action.

c)Order (5) does not in fact logically reflect my findings on all of the causes of action, particularly when they are regarded in totality.

d)Order (5) also renders the injunctive relief I have granted essentially meaningless, particularly in relation to the third cause of action, and that was not my intention.

Conclusion

[4]The judgment is recalled and amended by the deletion of order (5).

Solicitors:
Russell McVeagh, Wellington, for Plaintiff

Chapman Tripp Sheffield Young, Wellington, for Defendants Simpson Grierson, Wellington, for Third Defendant