16.09.2020

Salisbury Street Victory

On 10 September 2020, Osborne J delivered the long-awaited judgment in Body Corporate 335089 v Vero Insurance New Zealand Ltd and Body Corporate 341154 v Vero Insurance New Zealand Ltd.[1]  The judgment was a decisive victory for Vero represented by Christine Meechan QC and Hesketh Henry.

The matter concerned two substantially similar multi-unit complexes (insured by Vero) at 152 and 160 Salisbury Street, both of which suffered damage as a result of the Canterbury Earthquake sequence (CES).  The two cases were heard together in a single six week hearing between May and July 2019, which was the first fully electronic casebook trial to take place in the Christchurch High Court.

Each plaintiff sought declarations from the Court as to the earthquake damage to its property and the scope of work required to repair the damage (in each case seeking a rebuild of the four buildings at its property). 

The hearing was truly a battle of the experts – comprising almost in its entirety complex expert evidence from (among others) geotechnical, structural and civil engineers, many of whom submitted multiple briefs of evidence including during the course of the hearing itself.  Ultimately, in a detailed 150 page judgment, Osborne J found that the earthquake damage to the buildings was less extensive than contended by the plaintiffs and could be repaired by the remedial work proposed by Vero’s experts.

Although of course unique to the facts before it, the judgment addresses a number of technical issues that are of broader interest to insurers and the construction sector, including (among other things):

  • The extent to which cracking in concrete slab and panels is indicative of structural damage;
  • The efficacy of epoxy to repair cracks;
  • Establishing damage to piled foundations;
  • Use of finite element analysis as a predictive tool in conjunction with inspections; and
  • Application of the doctrine of natural servitude in respect of secondary flowpaths.

From an insurance perspective, the judgment provides a lucidly reasoned exposition of how a “when new” policy standard is to be applied to a technically complex set of evidential facts. 

Hesketh Henry lawyers acting on this matter were:  Helen Macfarlane, Stephanie Corban, Rob McStay and Alice Eager.

[1] [2020] NZHC 2353

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

Money stack black and white
Income is classified as relationship property – surprised?
For all couples, embarking on the journey of building a life together involves not only love and commitment but also financial considerations.  As you navigate through shared finances, it’s imp...
26.03.2024 Posted in Private Wealth
Forestry Unsplash ruben hanssen wl ylTCM
Forestry: Regulatory Roundup March 2024
The challenging economic environment for New Zealand’s forestry industry continues, with China’s demand for our logs remaining subdued. Moreover, in addition to the change in Government, t...
25.03.2024 Posted in Forestry & Property
solar
OIO Spotlight: Solar projects, exempted interests and farmland considerations
As New Zealand renewable energy developments continue to attract interest from global investors, we take a look at some recent approaches of the Overseas Investment Office in assessing consent require...
BCC Trade Credit v Thera Agri Capital: Policyholder Successful Against Credit Insurer in Australian Court of Appeal Decision
When applying for trade credit insurance, a prospective insured will typically provide information on the financing arrangements that will form the basis of cover. Where there is deviation from these ...
05.03.2024 Posted in Insurance & Trade and Transport
iStock
Parker v Magnum Hire: A new era of personal grievance remedies awarded in the Employment Relations Authority?
If you heard a sudden loud noise last week – no it wasn’t a jet plane flying overhead, it was the gasp of employment lawyers across New Zealand when the Employment Relations Authority published it...
26.02.2024 Posted in Employment
employment dictionary website
Banding together: the Court’s new approach to awards for injury to feelings
One of the key remedies available to an employee who has successfully established a personal grievance in the Employment Relations Authority (Authority) or the Employment Court (Court) is compensation...
23.02.2024 Posted in Employment
Trust liability under the Health and Safety at Work Act
WorkSafe New Zealand v RH & JY Trust & ors
21.02.2024 Posted in Health & Safety & Private Wealth
SEND AN ENQUIRY
Send us an enquiry

For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.