Accessibility Skip to Global Navigation Skip to Local Navigation Skip to Content Skip to Search Skip to Site Map

Articles for the keyword(s) "Jurisdiction"

"New Zealand Conflict of Laws – A Bird’s Eye View"

FM Auburn and PRH Webb, 1977

In this section of an overview of New Zealand Conflict of Laws, the impact of the Accident Compensation Scheme on transnational tort litigation is considered. The authors discuss the interpretation and application of the double actionability rule for tort within the context of the bar on proceedings for damages in terms of the Accident Compensation Act 1972, with specific reference to the problem of foreigners’ loss of earnings.

^ Top of page

"Nullity of Marriage and the Legitimacy of Children"

A Hiller, 1963

The author discusses, against the background of a historical and comparative survey of Roman, English, Australian and French law (as well as brief references to a number of other Continental systems, Mexico and Louisiana) the introduction of the putative marriage doctrine for children of void marriages into New Zealand law through the Matrimonial Proceedings Bill 1963 cl 8. While welcoming the creation of a presumption of legitimacy in favour of these children, the author is critical of the wide scope of the Bill as a result of the rejection of the requirement of a New Zealand domicile in respect of either of the parents.

^ Top of page

"Copyright Infringement in New Zealand Law"

Graeme W Austin, 2000

This article addresses the territoriality of copyright laws in the context of jurisdiction and choice of law. The traditional obstacles to the justiciability of foreign copyright claims in New Zealand, namely the local action jurisdiction rule in regard to foreign immovables and the double actionability tort choice of law rule, are considered in the light of recent developments in the USA, Canada, Australia and the UK. The author concludes that flexibility introduced by Peace v Ove Arup [1999] 1 All ER 769 (CA) may pave the way for New Zealand courts to assume jurisdiction in foreign copyright infringement disputes.

^ Top of page

"Birch v Birch: Conflicts of Laws Principles"

Simon Porter, 2002

This is an analysis of Birch v Birch [2001] 3 NZLR 413; [2001] NZFLR 563, which concerned the division of the proceeds of a (formerly) foreign immovable asset in terms of the Matrimonial Property Act 1976 and more specifically the dates at which to classify, value and establish jurisdiction over such property. Although the Family Court and the High Court reached the same result, the author does not find the different approaches and reasoning adopted by the different judges entirely convincing.

^ Top of page

"Reforming New Zealand’s Conflicts Process: The Case for Internationalisation"

Campbell McLachlan, 1984

This article calls for the adoption of an internationalist approach in developing the discipline of private international law in New Zealand. With reference to trans-national custody disputes and international child abduction, the author illustrates the need for internationally agreed solutions in order to secure conflicts justice for individuals caught up in trans-national family disputes. New Zealand should participate in the work of Hague Conference on Private International Law and contribute to the development of uniform private international law rules.

^ Top of page

“Conflict of Laws International Torts Cases: The Need for Reform on Both Sides of the Tasman”

Anthony Gray, 2006

The author argues that the double actionability rule, which has survived in New Zealand, is no longer best suited for choice of law in tort. Instead, the lex loci delicti should be the preferred rule supplemented by a flexible exception. The author undertakes an in-depth analysis of the North American jurisprudence in this area, focusing on the value of the distinction between conduct regulation and loss distribution. He concludes that Australia and New Zealand should adopt similar choice of law rules for torts.

^ Top of page

"New Zealand Conflict of Laws – A Bird’s Eye View"

FM Auburn and PRH Webb, 1978

In this section of an overview of New Zealand Conflict of Laws, the impact of the Accident Compensation Scheme on transnational tort litigation is considered. The authors discuss the interpretation and application of the double actionability rule for tort within the context of the bar on proceedings for damages in terms of the Accident Compensation Act 1972, with specific reference to the problem of foreigners’ loss of earnings.

^ Top of page

"From Savigny to Cyberspace: Does the Internet Sound the Death-Knell for the Conflict of Laws?"

Campbell McLachlan, 2006

This article examines the challenges posed by the internet for classic conflicts theory and method in regard to cross-border communications with specific reference to defamation, privacy and copyright. A detailed comparative survey refers extensively to law reform initiatives and jurisprudential developments in a number of Anglo-Commonwealth countries, as well as Europe. The author explores the dynamics of the interplay between jurisdiction and choice of law and its effect on the traditional principle of territoriality within the context of cross-border communications disputes.

^ Top of page

"Horse and Buggy on the Electronic Highway: Transnational Internet Defamation in the High Court of Australia"

Paul Myburgh and Rosemary Tobin, 2003

This article presents a critical analysis of the decision in Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick (2002) 194 ALR 433, [2002] HCA 56. The authors focus on the implications of the common law multiple publication rule and problems in locating the place of the tort for purposes of jurisdiction and choice of law in transnational internet defamation. Disappointment is expressed at the unwillingness of the majority to engage with and reformulate traditional defamation law principles in recognition of the revolutionary nature of internet communications.

^ Top of page

“Third (Anglo-Common Law) Countries and Rome II: Dilemma or Deliverance”

Elsabe Schoeman, 2011

The Rome II Regulation deals with choice of law in tort. The article examines the value of this Regulation vis-à-vis third (non-EU Anglo-Common law) countries, analysing the unique EU environment and the continuous movement towards uniformity and certainty. The author discusses the general choice of law regime laid down in Article 4 of the Regulation and applies it to two famous Anglo-Common law cases: Neilson v Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Ltd and Harding v Wealands, concluding that these cases would probably have been decided differently under Rome II. The article concludes that Rome II may indeed have comparative value for these third countries and that its importance should not be underestimated.

^ Top of page

“Service Abroad without Leave: Taking Seaconsar Seriously’’

Elsabe Schoeman, 2010

The New Zealand High Court Rules in respect of service abroad without leave (r 6.27) now incorporate the “serious issue to be tried on the merits” test. This article examines the important difference between the “good arguable case” and “serious issue to be tried on the merits” tests using Lord Goff’s authoritative statements in Seaconsar Far East Ltd v Bank Markazi Jomhouri Islami Iran. The author urges the Courts to embrace Lord Goff’s clarification as an opportunity to provide certainty and accuracy in relation to the interpretation and application of the “serious issue to be tried on the merits” test.

^ Top of page

“The Australia and New Zealand Judgments Scheme: A Common Law Judicial Area”

Oliver L Knöfel and Reid G Mortensen, 2011

This article provides a comprehensive background to the enactment of the trans-Tasman Proceedings Acts in both Australia and New Zealand within the context of the Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement (1983) between the two countries. It also provides a comparative perspective on the trans-Tasman vis-à-vis European Union, other European and Hague Conference arrangements in the area of cross-border jurisdiction and judgments. Discussing the details of the new trans-Tasman scheme, the authors identify a number of potential obstacles, one of those being the very different accident compensation schemes obtaining in New Zealand and Australia. On the whole, however, the scheme promises to be most successful in the regulation of trans-Tasman jurisdiction and judgments.

^ Top of page

“Conflict of Laws”

Elsabe Schoeman, 2013

This review of New Zealand cases and other developments covers the first series of cases dealing with the new High Court Rules, which came into operation on 1 February 2009. The review also covers the new Limitation Act 2010 and the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Act 2010, as well as a new case on the jurisdiction of a New Zealand court in respect of the infringement of a foreign (US)-registered patent.

^ Top of page

“The Choice of Law Agreement as a Reason for Exercising Jurisdiction”

Maria Hook, 2014

The author examines the effect of choice of law agreements on the courts’ exercise of jurisdiction. The focus is on whether English courts should exercise jurisdiction to uphold choice of law agreements that would otherwise be defeated in a competing forum. The author argues that the two main reasons advanced in support of this approach, that courts should prioritise the choice of law rules of the forum and that the parties should be held to their agreement, are not justifiable in principle. The author goes on to analyse how these reasons risk undermining the principle of close connection and party autonomy.

^ Top of page

"A View from Australia's Regional Partners - Recent Developments in New Zealand and Singapore"

Elsabe Schoeman and Adeline Chong, 2014

The authors consider recent conflict of laws developments in New Zealand and Singapore. The review of New Zealand developments covers the first series of cases dealing with the new High Court Rules, which came into operation on 1 February 2009. The review also covers the new Limitation Act 2010 and the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Act 2010, as well as a new case on the jurisdiction of a New Zealand court in respect of the infringement of a foreign (US)-registered patent.

^ Top of page

Conflict of Laws: Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments

David Goddard, 2009

This chapter in The Laws of NZ covers personal jurisdiction, limits on jurisdiction, anti-suit injunctions, enforcement and recognition of foreign judgments, and the concepts of domicile and residence.

^ Top of page

"The 'Statutist Trap' and Subject-Matter Jurisdiction"

Maria Hook, 2017

This article explores the problems associated with an exclusive focus by courts on statutory interpretation when determining whether a statute applies to foreign facts, overlooking the application of conflict of laws principles. This focus is referred to as “statutism.” In particular, the author focuses on how statutism risks distortion of established notions of subject-matter jurisdiction in two ways. First, statutism can lead courts to overlook the choice of law process. Courts may conclude that if the relevant statute does not apply they must lack subject-matter jurisdiction over the dispute, overlooking the possibility that they can adjudicate the dispute according to foreign law. Second, statutism, by deciding the question of subject-matter jurisdiction according to statutory interpretation, prevents a proper analysis of whether the court has subject-matter jurisdiction according to the external conflict of laws framework.