From 1 January 2026, the High Court (Improved Access to Civil Justice) Amendment Rules will come into force, introducing some of the most significant reforms to New Zealand’s civil litigation process in decades. The changes are designed to make High Court proceedings more proportionate, efficient, and accessible, addressing long-standing concerns about cost, delay, and complexity.
Why the changes?
Civil litigation in the High Court has often been criticised for being disproportionately expensive and time-consuming. The reforms are intended to:
- Improve access to justice by simplifying and streamlining procedures.
- Reinforce proportionality as the central principle of civil procedure.
- Reduce the time and cost associated with disclosure and evidence.
Key changes explained
1. Proportionality as the overriding objective
Proportionality is now the foundation of the Rules. All decisions about case management and procedure must ensure that the resources spent on a case are appropriate to the issues and amounts at stake.
2. Duty to co-operate
Parties and their lawyers now have an explicit duty to co-operate with each other and with the Court. This cultural shift is aimed at reducing unnecessary disputes and fostering more constructive engagement.
3. Case management reforms
Judges have greater flexibility to manage cases in ways that suit the circumstances. The Court can impose tighter timeframes, limit unnecessary steps, and actively shape proceedings to keep them focused on resolving the real issues.
4. Front-loaded disclosure
Traditional discovery is replaced with a new disclosure regime. Parties must provide comprehensive disclosure early, alongside their pleadings. This includes not only documents they rely on but also adverse documents that could harm their case.
5. Interlocutory applications
Applications such as strike-out, security for costs, and summary judgment must now be made promptly, generally within 25 working days. This change encourages parties to raise procedural issues at the outset rather than delaying progress.
6. Simplified evidence rules
Witness statements must be exchanged earlier in the process, helping to narrow issues sooner. The rules focus on what evidence is genuinely required to resolve the case, reducing scope for technical disputes.
Insights from the forensic eDiscovery perspective
As forensic eDiscovery specialists, we see these changes as both a challenge and an opportunity. The new front-loaded disclosure requirements mean parties will need to be smarter about managing large volumes of electronic information at the very start of a case. This is where advanced tools such as Technology Assisted Review (TAR) and Continuous Active Learning (CAL) become essential.
By leveraging TAR and CAL, legal teams can:
- Rapidly identify the most relevant documents from vast datasets.
- Ensure adverse material is not overlooked when meeting disclosure obligations.
- Reduce the total cost and time of review, while maintaining defensibility in Court.
Our experts have provided independent expert witness testimony on the defensibility of TAR and CAL workflows, demonstrating how AI-driven models can be transparently explained and relied upon in litigation. These capabilities align directly with the Court’s new emphasis on efficiency, proportionality, and early engagement with the real issues.
What this means for practitioners
Lawyers and litigants should prepare for:
- A more proactive judicial role in progressing cases.
- Early preparation of disclosure and evidence.
- An emphasis on co-operation and proportionality at every stage.
- Shorter timeframes for certain applications and procedural steps.
- Increased reliance on advanced eDiscovery tools to meet disclosure obligations.
Final thoughts
The High Court (Improved Access to Civil Justice) Amendment Rules 2025 mark a decisive move towards more efficient, proportionate litigation in New Zealand. By embedding proportionality as the overriding objective, requiring early disclosure, and reinforcing co-operation, the reforms aim to make civil justice more accessible and less daunting for those seeking redress. For practitioners, embracing modern forensic eDiscovery methods such as TAR and CAL will be critical in meeting these obligations effectively.
🔗 You can read the full text of the rules here: High Court (Improved Access to Civil Justice) Amendment Rules 2025
Forensic Tech 