Maintenance and champerty are concepts that more often than not hide behind the curtains at the party of legal arguments; mentioned only in the context of threatened extinction.

With great gusto they are back: centre stage, at a coming-out ball in Fleetwood Apartments [2014] NZHC 1514: a recent High Court case which has upheld an objection to an assignment of a cause of action for reasons of public policy, and offending the rule against maintenance and champerty.

This case will be of interest to anyone looking to include the assignment of a claim in the context of a settlement agreement. In any situation where there is any prospect of the assignment being deemed to be void, it would pay for the settlement agreement to be reversible in the event that the assignment is later rendered void.