Despite rule 3.1, the Chief High Court Judge may order that the court or one or more of its registries be closed for a period not exceeding one week specified in the order if an emergency exists in the place where the court or one or more of its registries is located.

For the avoidance of doubt, the Chief High Court Judge may make orders under subclause (1) in respect of consecutive periods of time.

In these rules, emergency includes the existence of a state of danger to the health and wellbeing of persons in a place (including the whole of New Zealand) as a result of the existence of a natural disaster, pandemic, armed conflict, or the like in that place:

provided that, for the purposes of these rules, an emergency exists in a place in respect of which,—

A Registrar must ensure that an order made under subclause (1) is immediately advertised in the manner the Judge directs.

For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this rule, or any other provision of these rules, relating to the powers of a Judge in respect of a proceeding in circumstances in which an emergency exists is intended to limit the court’s inherent jurisdiction.

Where an emergency exists in any part of New Zealand, a Judge may make a direction as to the form of participation by counsel, parties, witnesses, and other persons at any hearing or trial conducted pursuant to these rules, by—

No direction may be made under subclause (1) that modifies any requirement imposed by another provision of these rules more than is reasonably necessary to protect the health and wellbeing of those required or compelled to attend or participate in a hearing or trial, having regard also to,—

Subject to subclause (2), the power in subclause (1) may be exercised notwithstanding that it is contrary to any other provision of these rules, regulation, or rule of law.

In this rule and in rule 5.1B,—

Subject to subclauses (3) to (8), any document required by these rules to be filed may be filed in the proper registry of the court by—

Subclause (4) applies where any copy of any document filed by means of an electronic communication pursuant to these rules contains a signature or other mark or writing intended by the person responsible for the inclusion of that signature or other mark or writing in the document to convey their authorisation, certification, endorsement or authentication of any matter contained within the document copied.

In respect of a copy of a document to which this subclause applies, despite any provision in these rules, or in any enactment, regulation or rule of law to the contrary, that copy of a document, and any matter contained within it, is deemed to have been sufficiently authorised, certified, authenticated, signed, or otherwise endorsed for the purposes of these rules as if the original document had been filed.

For the avoidance of doubt, parties to proceedings and interlocutory applications are not required to have regard to High Court Practice Note 2019/1 (The Use of Electronic Common Bundles and Electronic Casebooks in the High Court) so far as that practice note requires the delivery of any common bundle or casebook to a registry by hand or by post, provided that parties must have regard to that practice note so far as it regulates the preparation and format of, and technical requirements for, the electronic common bundle or casebook.

A Judge (including an Associate Judge) may, if satisfied that an emergency in the place at which the registry of the court in question is situated means that the filing of documents other than electronically would cause, or risk causing, disruption to the orderly and safe dispatch of the court’s business, require that—

Subject to subclause (8), in the event of any inconsistency between any provision of this rule and any other provision of these rules or any other enactment, this rule prevails.

This rule is subject to rule 5.1B.

Subject to subclause (2), and despite any other provision of these rules or any other enactment or regulation to the contrary, a document—

A document is not filed until the earlier of the time that either—

Any contrary provision of these rules notwithstanding, a Judge (including an Associate Judge) may, in respect of a proceeding, if satisfied that the existence of an emergency in any part of New Zealand means the service of documents by other than electronic means would cause or risk causing disruption to the orderly and safe dispatch of the court’s business or harm to the health and wellbeing of any person, require that—

Subject to subclauses (4) to (6), an affidavit may be read and used in a proceeding or in respect of an interlocutory application only if it complies with subclause (2) or (3).

A sworn affidavit must be sworn—

An affirmed affidavit must comply with the Oaths and Declarations Act 1957.

Subject to subclause (5), a Judge or Registrar may direct that an affidavit that does not comply with either subclause (2) or (3) may—

A Judge may make an order, and a Registrar may make a direction, under subclause (4) in respect of an affidavit only if—

For the avoidance of doubt, in the event of any inconsistency between subclauses (4) and (5) and any other provisions of these rules, subclauses (4) and (5) prevail.