header-logo header-logo

Kicking off in Kiwi courts?

28 March 2013 / Georgia Dunphy , Andy Glenie
Issue: 7554 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Andy Glenie & Georgia Dunphy explain how to go about enforcing your judgment in New Zealand

Many British people will, when they think of New Zealand, picture a distant grassy field dotted with a few large rugby players, the odd little hobbit, and rather too many sheep. British lawyers will know that New Zealand has a legal system very similar to their own, with many inherited statutes and rules of common law. That shared heritage should reassure those who are from time to time called upon to have judgments of their own courts enforced against defendants with assets in New Zealand.

There are three routes by which a foreign judgment can be enforced by the High Court of New Zealand (High Court):

  1. under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934 (NZ) (the 1934 Act), which was based on the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 (UK);
  2. under s 56 of the Judicature Act 1908 (NZ) (the 1908 Act);
  3. at common law.

In addition, foreign arbitral awards may be enforced

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll