Fee Langstone's quiz team "Beyoncé Knowledge" had a fantastic evening at the Not The Boy's Club Quiz Night Extravaganza this month. The teams were lead through 5 rounds - identifying logos, science and nature, history, insurance and general knowledge. Thanks to the sponsors and to the Not the Boys Club for putting on a great event (and especially for the 16 metres of pizza!).
Read MoreInvestigation into the Performance of Statistics House in the 14 November 2016 Kaikoura Earthquake - Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Design standards and building laws will now be reviewed after an independent panel’s investigation into the unacceptable performance of Statistic House in Wellington in the Kaikoura earthquake.
Read MoreCongratulations to our law graduate Harriet Birch who was amongst the University of Auckland graduates receiving their degrees this month. Harriet graduated with a BA(Psychology)/LLB and also received a 2016 Deans Academic Excellence Award for finishing in the top 10% of this year’s graduates. Harriet is currently doing her professionals course while working and will be admitted to the bar in November.
Read More"Fee Langstone is effectively bigger than most litigation departments in the large full service firms – so that makes us unique and able to provide quality advice with commercial clarity on a wide range of issues"
Read MoreBPE Solicitors and Another v Hughes-Holland (in substitution for Gabriel) [2017] UKSC 21
What is the scope of a professional person’s duty? Is it a duty to provide information to help a client make a decision or is it a duty to advise on the merits of the transaction itself? What difference does this that make to extent of the professional’s liability? In this unanimous decision, the UK Supreme Court reaffirmed that an information provider is only responsible for the consequences of the information being wrong. Whereas an ‘adviser’ is responsible for the entire consequences of the client’s decision to enter into the transaction, even if the adviser’s mistake had nothing to do with the loss.
Fee Langstone has appointed three associates - Fran Darlow, Andrew Durrant and James Dymock
Read MoreCygnet Farms Limited v ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited [2016] NZHC 2838
This case illustrates an intriguing gap in the law where despite the plaintiffs having shown the bank breached a duty of care owed to them, resulting in loss, they were denied tortious damages through the application of the Contractual Remedies Act 1979.
Fee Langstone was proud once again to be a sponsor of the Insurers v Brookers Football Tournament on April 5th at the Eastern Suburbs AFC. Despite some rain, an energetic crowd turned up to watch all 6 teams play “the beautiful game.” The insurers were the big winners of the day, winning all three games. Thanks to all who attended.
Read MoreThe trip home from Wellington following the New Zealand vs Fiji football match (thanks Crombie Lockwood for hosting!) turned out to take rather longer than expected...
Read MoreSiemens (New Zealand) Limited v Broadspectrum (New Zealand) Ltd [2017] NZHC 287
An interesting point highlighted by this case is that for larger projects, insurance obligations set out in the policy and contractual documents do not always sit well together. In this case a master supply agreement between the two parties had two different clauses limiting liability to two different amounts.
Read More
Fee Langstone recently held its inaugural alumni evening. This was a night of celebration to show Fee Langstone's appreciation for our former colleagues whose hard work and support has made Fee Langstone what it is today. Alumni from the Fee Langstone, Jones Fee and Heaney Jones days gathered from around the country (and even Australia!) for a night of renewing old friendships and reliving past adventures. A comedy show from Ben Hurley topped off a fantastic night.
Invercargill City Council v Southland Indoor Leisure Centre Charitable Trust [2017] NZCA 68
The Court of Appeal has overturned the High Court and has found that the Invercargill City Council owed no duty of care to the Southland Indoor Leisure Charitable Trust, despite having issued a code of compliance certificate for work done on the roof of a building that later collapsed.
Read More“Working on brokers PI claims in London introduced me to so many different types of insurance risk – reinsurance, bankers blanket bond, D&O, property – it was a great way to get to know the industry and understand how it works.”
Read MoreAndrews Property Services Ltd v Body Corporate 160361 [2016] NZCA 644
This is an interesting case as builders, who were employed to fix the exterior of a leaky apartment complex, were not found to have a duty to warn the owners that a survey of the external damage had not been completed by the architects. However, the CA warned that there could be a duty in other circumstances.
Read MoreRoose v Duthie [2016] NZCA 600
This case provides a distinction between loss in a "flawed transaction" and loss in a "no transaction" in the context of sale and purchase of property.
The Court of Appeal also makes it clear that the subsequent discovery of fraud can be used to justify postponing the start of the limitation period in an existing cause of action.
Cleary v Ewart & Ewart [2017] NZHC 39
In this unusual case, a man entered into a Deed to purchase beachfront property in Fiji. The Deed, it turned out, conferred no rights upon him at all.
Read More"Insurance has such a broad reach across society that you get a really wide variety of legal issues and scenarios to consider, while also having to take into account an overlay of legal principles that are quite specialist and distinct from other areas of law. So for me, insurance law provides the best of both worlds."
Read MoreZurich Australian Insurance Ltd v Mark Donald Withers [2016] NZCA 618
The Court of Appeal has recently reconsidered the interpretation of the dishonesty exclusion in a professional indemnity policy. In finding for Zurich, the Court gave greater clarity to how the test will be applied, particularly to the relationship between breaches of the insured's professional standards and objective dishonesty.
Read MoreThe Supreme Court has today dismissed an appeal by Prattley Enterprises Limited, in a decision that will be well received by insurers who have been following this proceeding, in which an insured sought to re-open the settlement agreement for an earthquake claim for a commercial building held for investment purposes.
Read MoreGreat Lakes Reinsurance (UK) SE v Western Trading Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 1003
The decision considered the enforceability of clauses in an insurance policy that made payment of reinstatement costs conditional on the insured first incurring these costs itself, and commencing work in a reasonable time. Also considered was the position where it is unclear if the insured genuinely intends to reinstate the damaged property.
Read MoreAt Fee Langstone we’re experts in the field of insurance law. We are a team of skilled litigation lawyers, able to work with you to provide strategies and robust solutions, fast.
Fee Langstone
Tel. +64 9 373 0050
Level 18, 51 Shortland Street
Auckland 1010
reception@feelangstone.co.nz
Fee Langstone at Ruby Black
201-203 High Street
Christchurch
