Tyco's attempted withdrawal from fire claim case thwarted
Last week’s article about a High Court case involving The Warehouse incorrectly said the retailer had failed in a claim of negligence in the High Court.
In fact, the claim by The Warehouse over a fire at the Milford Centre where it is a tenant, has not yet been heard.
The Warehouse has claimed negligence by the owner of the shopping centre, Westgate No 1 (formerly Milford Centre), Westgate No 3 (formerly IMF New Zealand) Tyco New Zealand, Gibson Consultant Engineers and John Anthony Gibson.
The Warehouse claims that the defendants owed duties of care to carry out testing and surveying of the shopping centre fire sprinkler system but did not do so in some respects and argues that the fire would have been extinguished and damage to Warehouse stock avoided or reduced had they done so.
That case has yet to be heard.
Meanwhile Tyco Consultants, which is the third defendant in the Warehouse case, applied for a summary judgment to have itself removed from the case, arguing that it did not have a duty of care to The Warehouse.
In the hearing before Associate Judge John Faire, the lawyers argued over whether summary judgment was the best approach to do that. The judge ruled that summary judgment applications were appropriate where there is a complete and incontrovertible answer on the facts. He said there was no agreement on the facts and Tyco did not accept a number of allegations in the amended statement of claim. He refused the application.
NBR ONLINE apologises for mistaking the case for the main claim.