New Zealand Law Society
Added: Feb 22, 2012
The New Zealand Law Society is worried that proposed changes to the default judgment procedure will result in extra expense and the removal of some rights.
Comments provided by the Law Society to the Rules Committee on its consultation paper Proposed revision of default judgment and formal proof rules say the high cost of litigation has been the subject of much criticism.
“The proposed amendments to the default judgment procedures will undoubtedly result in additional cost which seems unjustified,” the comments state. “The Law Society is unaware of any dissatisfaction with the current procedures, and would be loath to see a further layer of costs imposed for no good reason.”
The Law Society says it believes the default position should be that judgment be granted on the papers unless the court requires otherwise. Where some hearing is needed, there would need to be appropriate provision in the schedule of costs to allow for the additional time required.
The current rules operate on the basis that a defendant who does not file a statement of defence is presumed to have no opposition to the entry of judgment. The Law Society says the reasoning behind the proposed rules erodes this presumption, and imposes on the court the role of protector of the defendant.