Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search


Joint And Several Liability Retainention Recommended


MEDIA RELEASE 24 June 2014 Hon Sir Grant Hammond KNZM


Law Commission

Law Commission Recommends Joint And Several Liability Be Retained

In their Report, Liability of Multiple Defendants (NZLC R132), which was tabled in the House of Representatives today, the Law Commission recommends that the existing rule of “joint and several liability” be retained, with some modifications.

Joint and several liability provides that where two or more persons (defendants) are liable to a person they have harmed (claimant) for the same harm or loss, they are each individually liable for all the damages awarded for the loss.

The President of the Law Commission, Hon Sir Grant Hammond, comments:

“There are a number of alternatives to joint and several liability, and our review investigated them all, in detail. We concluded that none was sounder in principle, or more likely to produce better policy outcomes. For example, proportionate liability can deliver cost benefits to defendants, in some cases. But this could only be done by putting claimants at much greater risk of not achieving effective compensation. Joint and several liability’s emphasis on achieving compensation for wrongs makes it still clearly the best system.”

Problems arise under any liability system, when some persons cannot pay because they are missing or insolvent. The fundamental issue between joint and several liability and proportionate liability comes down to who should bear the risk of these non-paying defendants: the other liable defendants, or the claimant? The Commission’s clear view is that defendants should continue to bear this risk.

The main alternative rule is some form of proportionate liability. This approach involves allocating each liable defendant their share of responsibility for the loss and then making them liable to pay only that share. The difference is that if a defendant cannot pay their share, the claimant cannot recover that uncollected amount from other defendants, even though they all contributed to the loss.

Law Commissioner Hon Dr Mapp said:

“Under joint and several liability, costs are only borne by parties who have been held to be at fault – they are all liable for all the undivided damage they have caused. Defendants can reduce their liability costs by seeking contribution orders against other defendants. Defendants will sometimes bear higher liability costs because of missing defendants and uncollectable shares. However, the Law Commission considers that an exception should be made for minor defendants so that they do not bear the full impact of joint and several liability, in extreme cases.”

Discretionary relief for minor defendants

The Commission proposes a discretion to grant relief to such a minor defendant, to allow courts to do justice in particular cases. The discretion should be exercised rarely and within limits that balance the interests of the person who suffered the loss with the person who caused the loss.

Capped liability for local authority building consent authorities

Local authorities acting as building consent authorities can experience excessive liability because they become potential “deep pockets” for building negligence claims.

The Commission proposes caps on local authority liabilities from future residential building consents. The caps should make it possible for local bodies to insure against potential liability. The Commission recommends initial caps of: $300,000 for each claim relating to a single dwelling; and $150,000 per dwelling for claims from dwellings in a multi-unit complex, with a $3 million cap per multi-unit development. The caps are not retrospective and joint and several liability still applies, up to the cap.

Capped liability for some auditors

The Commission accepts that a trans-Tasman market exists for audit services for New Zealand’s largest and most complex entities. Major auditors in Australia, who now compete for large New Zealand audit assignments, have access to state-by-state capped liability schemes. This provides them with a potential competitive advantage over their New Zealand counterparts. The Commission therefore recommends a capping scheme on similar terms to those in Australia, to allow fair competition between New Zealand and Australian firms competing for large audits in New Zealand.

The Commission concluded that the case for capped liability for other professional advisers or service providers is not similar. The Commission does not recommend capping schemes for various professional groups in New Zealand, as currently exist in Australia.


This media release and a pdf of the publication is available from our website at



© Scoop Media

Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines



Gordon Campbell: On John Key’s Trip To Iraq

In the embedded press coverage on this trip, the absence so far of any evaluation of the wider context of what New Zealand thinks it is doing at Camp Taji has been striking. More>>


Labour: Parata Puts Brakes On Charter School Appraisal

“When the Ministry of Education recommended they compare the achievements of children at charter schools to those of their counterparts at state schools, the documents show Hekia Parata specifically prohibited them from doing so." More>>


Bad Day For Universities: Gun, Bomb Threats On Three Campuses

Dunedin Police are continuing their investigation into the threat made against the University of Otago. Staff are following a number of lines of inquiry, and police are working to verify the authenticity and source of the post. More>>


Gordon Campbell: On The TPP Deal Reached In Atlanta

Yes, the TPP has helped to knock a few points off the tariffs facing our exporters. Yet some of those alleged dollar gains may well have been made regardless over time – and without the negative baggage of the concessions in the non-trade areas (intellectual property, copyright extensions, investor-state dispute mechanisms etc) that the TPP deal also brings in its wake. More>> (Cartoon by Dave Wolland)

Public Summaries:


Wellington.Scoop: Serco – First The Prisons, And Now It Wants To Run The Trains

As the government continues its inquiry into Serco’s discredited administration of Mt Eden prison in Auckland, here in Wellington there’s further scrutiny of the British outsourcing company – because it’s competing to take over the running of our commuter trains. More>>


Pre-Signing: Gordon Campbell On The TPP Countdown

To date, the Key government has been unwilling to share any information about this TPP deal until it is too late for outraged public opinion to affect the outcome... the disclosure process is likely to consist of a similarly skewed and careful exercise in spin. More>>


Australia Deportations: English Relaxed On Immigration Centre Conditions

Labour's Annette King: “There have been numerous reports from inside these detention centres on just how bad conditions are... If they were being held in any other foreign jail, I imagine Mr English would be somewhat concerned. More>>


Schools: Achievement-Based Funding Would Be A Disaster

The Education Minister’s speech to the PPTA Conference raising the spectre of achievement data driving a new funding system would be disastrous, says NZEI Te Riu Roa. More>>

  • Video Out-Link - PPTA Annual Conference 2015 on Livestream (Q+A dicussion suggests funding would be directed to less successful schools.)

  • ALSO:

    ECE Report:

    Get More From Scoop



    Search Scoop  
    Powered by Vodafone
    NZ independent news