Turner v Ford Pastoral Company Holdings (NZ) Limited

[2024] NZHC 886

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TAURANGA MOANA ROHE

CIV-2019-470-000130

[2024] NZHC 886

BETWEEN

GEOFFREY WILLIAM TURNER

Plaintiff

AND

FORD PASTORAL COMPANY HOLDINGS (NZ) LIMITED

Defendant

Hearing:

On the papers

Counsel:

M P Ward-Johnston for the Plaintiff

D Bigio KC and M Morrison for the Defendant

Judgment:

22 April 2024

JUDGMENT OF HARVEY J

This judgment is delivered by me on 22 April 2024 at 2.15 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

.....................................................

Registrar / Deputy Registrar

Counsel:Ward Johnston Barristers Limited, Tauranga D Bigio King’s Counsel, Auckland

Solicitors:           Kaimai Law, Tauranga (C Robbins)

Morrison Mallett, Auckland (M Morrison, S Tindale)

TURNER v FORD PASTORAL COMPANY HOLDINGS (NZ) LIMITED [2024] NZHC 886 [22 April 2024]

[1]    On 27 October 2023, I issued Turner v Ford Pastoral Company Holdings (NZ) Ltd.1 Prior to issuing that judgment, the plaintiff Mr Turner sadly passed away. I noted this in the decision and indicated that the award issued to Mr Turner may be substituted to his estate, should substitution be arranged per r 4.50 of the High Court Rules 2016.2

[2]    However, a joint memorandum had been filed on 26 October 2023, seeking a new parties order under r 4.52 in favour of Karen Anne Turner, the executor and trustee in the estate of Mr Turner. A copy of probate was filed confirming those details. Regrettably, the application was not before me at the time of issuing judgment.

[3]    The defendants have consented to the application. As indicated by my comments at [6] and [102] of the substantive judgment, I am satisfied that, in the circumstances, a new parties order may be made substituting Ms Turner as plaintiff under r 4.52. While uncommon, there is no bar to the issuing of a new parties order after final judgment has been issued.3 Counsel for the plaintiff has indicated that, while an appeal has not been pursued at this stage, a new parties order will assist in the expedient payment of costs as agreed between the parties.

[4]The application per r 4.52 is now granted.

Harvey J

1      Turner v Ford Pastoral Company Holdings (NZ) Ltd [2022] NZHC 3017. The conclusions contained in that judgment and are not relevant to the present application.

2      At [102] and [6].

3      See Jessica Gorman and others McGechan on Procedure (online ed, Thomson Reuters) at [HR4.52.01], and Cathie v Simes (2004) 17 PRNZ 155 (CA).