This note is not part of the rules, but is intended to indicate their general effect.
These rules, which come into force on 1 July 2002, amend the High Court Rules.
Rule 3 substitutes a new rule 45 for the existing rule relating to change of solicitor and change of address for service. The new rule applies to any change of representation whereas the current rule applies only to a change of solicitor. (Rule 44 of the District Courts Rules 1992 is replaced by a new rule 44 in the same terms by the District Courts Amendment Rules 2002.)
Rule 4 revokes subclauses (6) and (7) of rule 61C of the High Court Rules. Rule 61C sets out the procedure for review by a Judge of a decision of a Master in Chambers. Rule 61C(6) requires the leave of a Judge to appeal from a decision of a Judge on a review. Rule 61C(7) requires notice of application for leave to appeal to be filed and served within 7 days after the decision on the review was given. The revocation of subclauses (6) and (7) removes doubt about the validity of those provisions on the basis that a requirement for leave should be imposed by statute.
Rule 5 substitutes a new heading for the existing heading to rules 324 to 330 of the High Court Rules relating to Court experts.
Rule 6 amends rule 324 of the High Court Rules relating to the appointment of Court experts. The effect of the amendment is that, unless the parties agree, a person may not be appointed as a Court expert if the person has been appointed under new rule 330B as an independent expert to convene a conference of expert witnesses.
Rule 7 inserts new rules 330A to 330D into the High Court Rules. The new rules relate to giving of evidence by experts.
The new rule 330A will require expert witnesses to comply with a Code of Conduct that sets out the obligations of expert witnesses when giving evidence. The Code of Conduct is set out in the new Schedule 4 of the High Court Rules.
The new rule 330B empowers the Court to direct expert witnesses to confer, on the matters on which they are to confer, to try to reach agreement on matters in issue in the proceeding, and to prepare a joint witness statement that sets out the matters on which the expert witnesses agree or disagree, including their reasons for disagreeing. With the agreement of the parties, the Court may direct the expert witnesses to confer in the absence of the legal advisers to the parties and to prepare a joint witness statement without assistance from those advisers. The new rule also allows the Court, with the agreement of the parties, to appoint an independent expert to convene a conference of expert witnesses.
The new rule 330C relates to the status of joint witness statements. The new rule provides that rules 441D to 441L of the High Court Rules apply to a joint witness statement as if the statement were a written statement under rule 441B or rule 441C of the High Court Rules. Those rules relate to the exchange of witnesses' statements. It also makes it clear that an expert witness is not precluded from giving evidence at the hearing merely because he or she has participated in the preparation of a joint witness statement.
The new rule 330D allows the Court to direct that evidence of expert witnesses is given after factual evidence or in any other order.
Rule 8 is a transitional rule. It provides that the new rule 330A does not apply to an expert witness if the hearing of a proceeding has commenced or if the time for serving a witness statement under rule 441B or rule 441C has expired.
Rule 9 amends rule 458D(1) of the High Court Rules. Rule 458D(1) lists enactments under which applications may be made by way of an originating application. Section 7 of the Habeas Corpus Act 2001 requires an application for a writ of habeas corpus to be made by way of an originating application in the manner provided by the High Court Rules. This amendment brings habeas corpus applications under Part IVA of the High Court Rules.
Rule 10 inserts a new rule 458N in the High Court Rules. The new rule 458N provides that certain rules in Part 4A (rules 458H, 458I, and 458J relating to directions and rule 458K relating to conferences) do not apply to an originating application for a writ of habeas corpus.
Rules 11 to 14 and 18 to 22 amend a number of rules and forms as a consequence of the substitution, by the High Court Amendment Rules (No 2) 2001, of rule 14 of the High Court Rules. Rule 14 excludes the period 25 December to 15 January in calculating a period in which a particular thing must be done.
Rule 15 substitutes a new form 4 (Notice of change of representation or address for service) in Schedule 1 of the High Court Rules. (A corresponding new form 3 is substituted in the District Courts Rules 1992 by the District Courts Amendment Rules 2002.)
Rules 16, 17, 19, 20, and 21 amend a number of forms to remove references to costs as a consequence of the changes to the costs rules made by Part 1 of the High Court Amendment Rules 1999. In general, costs are assessed according to the new costs rules and Schedules 2 and 3 at the completion of a proceeding. The requirement for a plaintiff to claim costs specifically is no longer necessary.
Rule 23 amends form 92 (Creditor's petition for an order of adjudication of a bankrupt) in Schedule 1 of the High Court Rules. The amendment aligns the form with form 91 and makes it clear that the signature of the petitioning creditor must be witnessed. The amendment corrects an anomaly identified by Master Gambrill in Palmer v Harts Contributory Mortgages Nominee Co Ltd (HC Auckland, B No 297-IM0, 8 August 2001).
Rule 24 inserts into Schedule 3 of the High Court Rules a new item allowing for the recovery of costs for preparation for the hearing of a defended summary judgment application.
Rule 25 adds a new Schedule 4 to the High Court Rules. The new Schedule sets out the Code of Conduct for expert witnesses.