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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll