LLB (Hons), Senior Associate
Shane Campbell
Shane is a senior associate in our national Dispute Resolution Team where he works with Jared Ormsby.  Shane has appeared in the High Court, Court of Appeal and in disciplinary matters for professional liability matters.  He specialises in all commercial litigation, with a particular interest in trusts and estates, contract and company matters, negligence, construction, debt collection, and declaratory proceedings.  Within the team Shane is a mentor to junior lawyers including law clerks, solicitors and associates.

Shane previously worked as a Judges' Clerk for the High Court.  He has a first class honours degree in law from the University of Canterbury where he won several prizes throughout his degree including in tax, intellectual property and family law.  He graduated second in his year, jointly winning the University Prize in Law.  He has also tutored land law, criminal law and criminal procedure.

Shane is currently a member of the New Zealand Law Society Civil Litigation and Tribunals Committee.  He regularly writes articles that are published in academic journals and has presented a seminar for the New Zealand Law Society on costs in civil litigation.
Wynn Williams (Christchurch)
Level 5, Wynn Williams House,
47 Hereford Street,
Christchurch 8013,
New Zealand.

Recent Projects

  • Acting as junior counsel in the Court of Appeal in a proceeding successfully overturning a decision by the High Court refusing invalidly appointed trustees an indemnity.
  • Acting as junior counsel in the High Court acting for trustees and former trustees in relation to an application for directions and for approval of a scheme under the Charitable Trusts Act. The application for directions was granted with the result the scheme application was no longer required.
  • Acting as junior counsel defending a lease dispute for alleged breaches of the covenants of quiet enjoyment and non-derogation from grant.
  • Successfully striking out a counter-claim for over $1,000,000 relating to breaches of statutory duties under the Personal Property Securities Act 1999.
  • Successfully obtaining approval of a scheme to vary a charitable trust in Canterbury after a building was damaged in the Canterbury earthquakes and the Trust had insufficient funds to properly repair the site.
  • Successfully obtaining judgment at a defended hearing for judgment debt following default by debtors and repossession of goods.
  • Successfully defending a plaintiff's application for summary judgment on recovery of a debt said to be owing under a personal guarantee.
  • Defending a defendant's application for summary judgment – the proceeding settled before judgment was released.
  • Acting for a large global company in a dispute of the quality of raw materials received from suppliers.
  • Acting for a builder against a former solicitor that failed to confirm an agreement for sale and purchase.
  • Acting for the vendors following the sale of a business in defending a claim for misrepresentation and breaches of the Fair Trading Act.
  • Acting for managers of a body corporate for allegedly failing to obtain sufficient insurance cover prior to the Canterbury earthquakes.
  • Acting for accountants in a complaint to the Professional Conduct Committee of the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants.
  • Acting for the trustees of a trust in relation to breaches of restrictive building covenants granted in favour of the trustees.

Recent Articles


Purchase of real estate: High Court reminder of what not to do when another party tries to cancel an agreement

Associate Judge Sargisson's decision in Sutton v van Der AA is a timely reminder of how parties should act if they do not accept a repudiation (cancellation) of an agreement by the other party. In essence, if you do not accept the repudiation then you should conduct yourself that way by your words and actions.

Keep reading...


"No Oral Variation" clauses and their enforceability: the current legal landscape in New Zealand and England

Is it possible to agree in writing that you will not alter that agreement other than by writing? It is common for commercial contracts to have a clause proscribing oral variations (or variations by conduct), or at least attempting to do so. It is also increasingly common for parties to enter into dispute about the efficacy of oral variations notwithstanding the presence of such clauses. The question for practitioners is whether such clauses are enforceable.

Keep reading...


Supreme Court clarifies when litigation funding amounts to an abuse of process

The cost of access to the courts is commonly seen as one of, if not the most, significant barriers to access justice. This is true even for corporates. The decision in PriceWaterhouseCoopers v Walker was concerned with the validity of a litigation funding agreement between a company called SPF No. 10 Limited, the liquidators of Property Ventures Limited and related companies, Messrs Robert Walker and John Marshall.

Keep reading...


Court of Appeal revisits the lawyer-litigant exception in costs

On 14 June 2017 the Court of Appeal held that the lawyer-litigant exception is not justifiable under the specific costs rules now in place. This article summarises the rationale of the decision.

Keep reading...


Fluoridation of water in New Zealand – have your say

On the 17 November 2016, the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill (Bill) was introduced into Parliament; its aim being to amend the Health Act 1956 (Act) to enable District Health Boards (DHBs) to make decisions and give directions about the fluoridation of government drinking water supplies in their areas.

Keep reading...


The importance of complying with court orders

When a court makes an order, the party or parties against whom those orders are made may well query what will happen if they do not comply with those orders. The recent decision of Palmer J in Zhang v King David Investments Ltd (in Liq) [2016] NZHC 3018 provides an example of the adverse consequences which can occur.

Keep reading...


High Court reaffirms New Zealand's stance on suing for personal injury

In McGougan and Dingle v Depuy International Limited [2016] NZHC 2511 the High Court was required to determine the scope of the bar against claims for personal injury in s 317(1) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 (ACA). The particular question for consideration was whether a person could bring a claim for compensatory damages (i.e. sue for damages flowing from personal injury) in New Zealand, where they have cover under the ACA, but where the conduct giving rise to the claims occurred outside of New Zealand.

Keep reading...


Exclusion of improperly obtained evidence in civil proceedings

On 26 October 2016, the Supreme Court released its decision in Marwood v Commissioner of Police [2016] NZSC 139. This decision required the Court to determine whether New Zealand courts have jurisdiction to exclude improperly obtained evidence in civil proceedings and, if so, whether the jurisdiction should be exercised on the facts of the case before it.

Keep reading...

Reported Decisions

  • Butterfield v Public Trust [2017] NZCA 367, [2017] NZAR 1439, [2017] NZCCLR 27
  • Re Burnett Mount Cook Station Charitable Trust [2016] NZHC 2669, (2016) 4 NZTR 26-024


  • Solicitors' Undertakings: What they are and Consequences for Failing to Abide Them [2017] NZLJ 348
  • Fetters upon the Exercise of Contractual Discretion [2017] New Zealand Law Journal 141
  • Case Review: Real Finance Ltd v Setefano [2017] New Zealand Law Journal 38
  • Into the River of Censorship? [2016] New Zealand Law Journal 75
  • Procedural Non-compliance and Want of Prosecution in Criminal Appeals [2015] New Zealand Law Journal 349
  • Reviewing Costs in Public Interest Litigation [2015] New Zealand Law Journal 246
  • Habeas Corpus and Some Procedural Bumps in the Road [2015] New Zealand Law Journal 197
  • Discharge Without Conviction for First Time Young Offenders [2014] New Zealand Law Journal 430
  • The Rise and Evolution of the McKenzie Friend [2014] New Zealand Law Journal 326
  • Title to Life: Time for Reform? (2013) 32(4) Medicine and Law 503

Enter security code:
 Security code

Wynn Williams Christchurch
Level 5, Wynn Williams House, 47 Hereford Street, Christchurch 8013, New Zealand.
PO Box 4341, DX WX11179, Christchurch 8140.
+64 3 379 7622
+64 3 379 2467
Wynn Williams Auckland
Level 11, AIG Building, 41 Shortland Street, Auckland 1010, New Zealand.
PO Box 2401, Shortland Street, Auckland 1140.
+64 9 300 2600
+64 9 300 2609

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with stylesheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so. The latest version of Firefox, Safari or Google Chrome will work best if you're after a new browser.