Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Webb Farry’s litigators are focused on achieving your objectives.
Our Litigation and Dispute Resolution team – headed by Partner John Farrow and including experienced Associate Melanie Hayes – believes that taking legal advice early is generally the most timely, cost effective and efficient route to a dispute’s resolution. We can advise the most appropriate path to take, whether that be negotiation, arbitration, mediation or issuing court proceedings.
We have significant experience appearing in specialist tribunals and commissions – including the Liquor Licensing Authority, Coroner’s Court, Medical Disciplinary Tribunal and Employment Relations Authority – as well as the District, Environment, Employment and High Courts and the Court of Appeal.
Examples of Webb Farry’s work with clients
- Conducting successful Judicial Review proceedings against the Dunedin City Council on behalf of Anzide Properties Limited, in relation to an illegal road designation. This included obtaining injunctive relief and a significant costs order in favour of our client
- Successfully defending a large claim brought against two manufacturing industry clients by a former shareholder. The claim was heard over six days in the High Court and involved allegations of prejudicial and misleading conduct, breach of contract, conversion and detinue
- Acting on behalf of a national lender on various matters, including obtaining a multimillion dollar Summary Judgment in the High Court against a debtor and successfully applying to the High Court to remove an illegal caveat lodged against land
- Acting on behalf of the New Zealand Police Association for one of its members in a claim brought under the Bill of Rights Act, alleging trespass, misfeasance in a public office and malicious procurement of a search warrant. We worked with Crown Law (acting for the Attorney General) and negotiated the withdrawal of the claim against our client
- Successfully arguing the landmark Consumer Guarantees Act case of Stephens v Chevron Motor Court Limited. It was determined that a vehicle which required substantial on-going repairs was not “fit for the purpose” and the Plaintiff was entitled to cancel the vehicle purchase contract and receive a refund of monies paid
"Getting the problem sorted. That’s our goal. Our approach is to cut to the heart of the matter and manage your dispute in a commercial and cost-effective way."