Significant reforms to New Zealand’s High Court Rules - aimed at improving access to civil justice and tackling costly delays - will come into effect in January 2026. These long-anticipated changes, years in the making, will follow hot on the heels of the new Commercial List being introduced in the Auckland High Court in October 2025. Together, these developments signal a major shift toward a more streamlined, cost-effective, and proportionate litigation process. But they also represent a fundamental change to how cases will be managed and heard.

Here is everything you need to know.

Auckland High Court Commercial List - October 2025

From 6 October 2025, a new Commercial List will operate in the Auckland High Court.

We have previously signalled these changes, but in short, the Commercial List will introduce a fast-track procedure for specified commercial cases in the High Court at Auckland. Two dedicated Judges from the Commercial Panel will oversee the List which is designed to expedite the case management and interlocutory phases of eligible matters, and to encourage prompt substantive hearings. In return for the streamlined judicial approach, parties are expected to cooperate with each other, comply with timetable directions and engage on the issues from the outset. The Commercial List applies to Auckland cases only but the existing Commercial Panel will continue for other regions and very large cases.

The Chief High Court Judge recently issued a Practice Note for the Auckland High Court Commercial List, which you can access here.

Changes to High Court Rules - January 2026

From 1 January 2026, major changes to the High Court Rules will take effect as the High Court (Improved Access to Civil Justice) Amendment Rules 2025 come into force.

These include:

• A new overriding objective which introduces the concept of proportionality, and a general duty of cooperation between the parties.
  
  New disclosure rules
• The current discovery regime is being replaced with an enhanced initial disclosure process. This will require parties to disclose documents when they file their first documents at Court, which will now include all adverse documents as well as those referred to in pleadings or that parties intend (presently) to rely on at trial.
• The rationale for this major shake-up to the discovery process is to reduce the excessive documentation currently produced in litigation while ensuring relevant and essential documents are available to all parties.
• Although further disclosure can be ordered or provided at any time, these changes will require more front-loading of disclosure, and will mean that defendants in particular will need to be quick off the mark to locate and disclose all required documents at the same time as they file their statement of defence (which is now due 30 working days after they are served with a claim).
  
  Interlocutory applications to be streamlined
• Certain interlocutory applications (those that could potentially bring an end to a proceeding) are now to be notified and brought quickly (notification within 10 days of the last pleading and filing within 15 days of notification). Hearings of these applications will be in-person.
• For other interlocutory applications, the Court may make a decision on the papers without a hearing, or it can schedule a 2-hour standard hearing time for the matter to be heard in Chambers in-person or remotely.
  
  Greater involvement of Judges through the introduction of Judicial Issues Conferences
• Case management conferences will be replaced by more detailed, mandatory Judicial Issues Conferences (JICs), at which parties will be required to identify the issues in the case and their respective positions on them, and will address the procedural steps needed before trial. It is hoped that this earlier focus on identifying the key issues may also facilitate the earlier resolution of cases.
  
  Factual evidence filed earlier, with more emphasis on witnesses’ personal knowledge, and less on documents
• Factual witness statements and standardised chronologies will now be filed much earlier in the proceeding:
  • For plaintiffs - within 25 working days of the last pleading or resolution of specified interlocutories (eg summary judgment); and
  • For defendants - within 45 working days of the date they receive the plaintiff’s evidence.
• Factual witness statements must now be confined to personal knowledge and should not simply recite or summarise documents; rather documents should only be referred to if the witness has relevant evidence to give about them. If parties wish to set out the events arising from the documentary record in narrative form, they should now do so in the chronology, not in witness evidence.
  
  Only one expert per party per topic
• The new Rules presume that there will now only be one expert per party per topic and experts conferences will be ordered by the Court, possibly in the absence of legal advisors.
  
  Streamlining how documents are received into evidence at trial
• Under the new rules, documents in the common bundle are automatically received into evidence and presumed to be admissible if referred to in a witness statement, chronology or opening submissions.
• Parties may object to admissibility of documents in the common bundle, but the Court will have the final say on this, and may even order costs if objections are contrary to the overriding objective.

The new Rules include a flowchart summary of the new High Court process (at r 6.1A) - you can see a copy of that here.

Ultimately, these reforms are aimed at streamlining litigation and reducing costs. While there will be more up-front work (and therefore costs), we are hopeful these changes will be a positive step towards reducing the time it takes for cases get to trial. Needless to say, 2026 is set to be a year of significant change for parties bringing or defending claims in the High Court.

Want to know more?

If you would like to know more about these changes, please get in touch with one of our experts.

You can also read Financial Services Litigation Partner Ben Upton’s recent interview in the NBR where he spoke to the Co-Editor about why these upcoming changes to address civil court delays are “about as momentous as it gets when it comes to courtroom changes.” Read the full interview here [paywall].