Shane Campbell

LLB (Hons), Partner

Shane is a partner in our national Dispute Resolution Team.  Shane has appeared in the District Court, High Court, Court of Appeal, arbitrations, adjudications and in disciplinary matters for professional liability matters.  He specialises in complex commercial disputes.  He has a particular interest in contentious trusts and estates, contract and company matters, negligence,  and insolvency.

Shane previously worked as a Judges' Clerk for the High Court at Christchurch.  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. 

Shane has tutored and lectured at the University of Canterbury, currently sits on the New Zealand Law Society Civil Litigation and Tribunals Committee, and contributes regularly to academic articles.

Shane has been nationally recognised as a 'Rising Star' on the NZ Lawyer Rising Stars List 2021. Shane has also been recognised as a notable practitioner by the Chambers Asia-Pacific 2021 and Chambers Global 2021.

Recent Projects

  • Successfully defending an appeal against a strike-out decision. The Court of Appeal agreed with the High Court on the interpretation of the limitation provisions in the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 (CCCFA) and held that the claim by Mr Watherston was appropriately struck out in the High Court: Watherston v PGW Rural Capital Limited [2020] NZCA 329.

  • Successfully defending a claim that two wills were “mutual wills” in that they created a constructive trust over the estate of a deceased which was held for the benefit of others: McNeish v McArthur [2020] NZHC 1611. Successfully obtaining an award of costs following this judgment: McNeish v McArthur [2019] NZHC 3281.

  • Successfully arguing that there was consideration in a varied agreement by the practical benefit test. This case arose in the context of a franchise agreement of a fixed term. The plaintiff alleged repudiation. This judgment was the second hearing following an interim judgment: Gloria Jean’s Coffees International Pty Ltd v Daboko Limited [2020] NZHC 29.

  • Acting for beneficiaries of a trust in seeking an interim injunction restraining steps being taken by trustees in a situation of conflict: McLaughlin v McLaughlin [2019] NZHC 2597, [2019] NZFLR 299.

  • Acting for the respondent in bringing a successful strike-out application striking out a claim alleging oppressive conduct under the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 on the basis they were time-barred: Watherston v PGW Rural Capital Limited [2019] NZHC 22 In Watherston v PGW Rural Capital Limited [2019] NZHC 1601 a subsequent issue was litigated over the proper approach to costs where a party has brought an interlocutory application seeking a number of orders.

  • Successfully defending a claim at trial that a franchisee had unlawfully repudiated a contract. The two parties had differing versions of the same agreement. The plaintiff alleged that its version was legitimate. The defendant alleged its version was legitimate. This judgment was an interim judgment: Gloria Jean’s Coffees International Pty Ltd v Daboko Limited [2019] NZHC 1097.

  • A successful application for wasted costs against lay litigants arising from a late change of expert that rendered a conferral process obsolete: Nielsen v Earthquake Commission [2019] NZHC 629.

  • Costs litigation over the costs principles that should apply to a regional council where it has acted responsibly in litigation: Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Inc v Northland Regional Council [2019] NZHC 449, [2019] NZAR 587.

  • Defending an application for leave to continue a claim against a company in liquidation: JK Trading Limited v Rimpro-Tec Ltd (in liq) [2019] NZHC 376.

  • Successfully appealing against a costs order made in relation to trustees de son tort. On appeal the Court of Appeal confirmed that trustees who were validly appointed at the outset, whose terms had expired, were entitled to be indemnified for their costs and expenses provided they were reasonably and properly incurred: Butterfield v Public Trust [2017] NZCA 367, [2017] NZAR 1439, (2017) 23 PRNZ 575. This followed a judgment of the High Court refusing to award costs in favour of the trustees in Re Burnett Mount Cook Station Charitable Trust [2017] NZHC 169.

  • Successfully striking out a counterclaim brought against De Lage Landen Ltd on the basis it was vexatious: De Lage Landen Ltd v Crafar [2017] NZHC 1419

  • Successfully obtaining judgment at trial against guarantors pursuant to certain credit contracts: De Lage Landen v Crafar [2017] NZHC 2709.

  • Successfully opposing the entry of summary judgment pursuant to a guarantee : Beneficial Finance Ltd v Brown [2017] NZHC 964.

  • Successfully obtaining directions about the interpretation of a trust deed and the permissibility of sale in the context of a charitable trust. This litigation generated a number of other judgments ([2016] NZHC 2214; [2016] NZHC 2631). Re Burnett Mount Cook Station Charitable Trust [2016] NZHC 2669, (2016) 4 NZTR 26-024.

  • Advising a local authority on the merits of a threatened judicial review over a commercial tender process.

  • Advising and representing a company in relation to a Commerce Commission investigation into potential anti-competitive conduct.

  • Advising and representing a beneficiary of an estate in relation to a Family Protection Act claim brought by a disgruntled beneficiary.

  • Acting for trustees of a charitable trust in obtaining a scheme to vary a charitable trust because it is no longer fit for purpose.

  • Advising and representing a party in bringing proceedings against their former solicitor for negligently failing to confirm and agreement for sale and purchase.

  • Advising and representing a party in bringing proceedings against their former solicitor for breach of fiduciary duty in relation to non-disclosure of information and taking loans from the client.

  • Advising and representing a party in bringing proceedings against their real-estate agent for negligent valuation and selling a property at an undervalue.

  • Acting for an accountant in disciplinary proceedings before the Chartered Accountants of Australia and New Zealand.

  • Acting for a multi-national in a dispute of the quality of raw materials received from suppliers.

  • 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.
    •

Recent Articles

3/06/2020

Affidavits of documents in multi-party litigation: Court of Appeal provides welcome guidance

The current James Hardie litigation concerns allegations that certain exterior cladding products manufactured by the James Hardie group were defective, which defects are alleged to have caused moisture ingress and associated damages.

Keep reading...



19/03/2020

The impact of COVID-19 on cashflow and solvency

The continuing spread of COVID-19 and government measures in response means an economic downturn with increasing business failures. What should business owners consider in these circumstances?

Keep reading...



19/03/2020

Backing out of a deal as a result of COVID-19

The spread of COVID-19 and government measures in response is leading businesses to reconsider whether they should go ahead with some deals currently under negotiation. When can your business or your counterparty back out of a deal under negotiation?

Keep reading...



19/03/2020

The impact of COVID-19 on performance of contracts

The spread of COVID-19 and government measures in response are affecting supply chains and the ability of businesses to perform their contracts. What if your business or your supplier (or other counterparty) is prevented from carrying out its obligations?

Keep reading...



19/03/2020

COVID-19 and the business-as-usual side of disputes

It is important during times like these to remember the ‘business as usual’ aspects of life and litigation that, if ignored, can create bigger issues down the track. 

Keep reading...



3/10/2018

Voidability of third-party payments

A company is teetering on the verge of insolvency. Its creditors are numerous. The company arranges for a third party to settle some of its debts on its behalf, but nonetheless tips over into liquidation. Can the liquidators recover the monies paid to the company’s creditors?

Keep reading...



28/09/2018

The neighbourly bane of trees blocking light: what can you do?

Boundary trees block your views, access to light, or even Wi-Fi signals. What can you do? This was the issue that came before the High Court on appeal from the District Court in Vickery v Thoroughgood [2018] NZHC 2303.

Keep reading...



27/08/2018

Receiverships: who, what and why

The recent enforced receivership of national construction firm Ebert Construction has thrust receiverships back into the spotlight. With some 95 staff laid off and creditors owed around $40 million, the consequences of a high-profile company being forced into a receivership are apparent. Nonetheless, many people involved in the construction industry, and the general public, may have little knowledge of what a receivership entails.

Keep reading...



11/05/2018

Hawkins liable for $13.4 million: summary of the latest case involving builder negligence

In a judgment released on 1 May 2018 Downs J, in a 344 paragraph judgment, has found H Construction North Island Limited (formerly Hawkins Construction North Island Limited) liable for serious building defects at the Botany Downs Secondary College.

Keep reading...



16/03/2018

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...



2/02/2018

"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...



16/10/2017

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...



18/08/2017

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...



20/01/2017

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...



21/12/2016

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...



8/12/2016

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...



18/11/2016

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

  • Watherston v PGW Rural Capital Limited [2020] NZCA 329.

  • McNeish v Arthur [2019] NZHC 3281.

  • Gloria Jean’s Coffees International Pty Ltd v Daboko Limited [2020] NZHC 29.

  • McLaughlin v McLaughlin [2019] NZHC 2597, [2019] NZFLR 299.

  • Gloria Jean’s Coffees International Pty Ltd v Daboko Limited [2019] NZHC 1097.

  • Nielsen v Earthquake Commission [2019] NZHC 629.

  • Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Inc v Northland Regional Council [2019] NZHC 449, [2019] NZAR 587.

  • JK Trading Limited v Rimpro-Tec Ltd (in liq) [2019] NZHC 376.

  • Watherston v PGW Rural Capital Limited [2019] NZHC 22.

  • De Lage Landen v Crafar [2017] NZHC 2709.

  • Butterfield v Public Trust [2017] NZCA 367, [2017] NZAR 1439, (2017) 23 PRNZ 575.

  • De Lage Landen Ltd v Crafar [2017] NZHC 1419.

  • Beneficial Finance Ltd v Brown [2017] NZHC 964.

  • Re Burnett Mount Cook Station Charitable Trust [2016] NZHC 2669, (2016) 4 NZTR 26-024.

Memberships

  • Associate Member of AMINZ

  • Committee Member of the New Zealand Law Society Civil Litigation and Tribunals Committee

  • Institute of Directors

  • RITANZ
    •

Publications

  • S Campbell and W Porter “The wage subsidy and company liquidations” [2020] New Zealand Law Journal 342

  • Expert Determination as Dispute Resolution in New Zealand (2020) 30(2) Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 142

  • Executors and Trustees of Estates: An Obligation to Invite Adverse Claims Against an Estate? [2018] NZLJ 75

  • 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
    •
Share this page on social media:



Enter security code:
 Security code

Top

Wynn Williams Client Toolkit


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.