Appeals and counter-appeals have been lodged in the Court of Appeal by warring aviation companies Heli Holdings, in Auckland, and The Helicopter Line, in Queenstown, as the two fight over up to $14 million.
Heli Holdings is a subsidiary of listed Airwork Holdings, a major player in the air freight sector, while The Helicopter Line is a subsidiary of listed tourism heavyweight Skyline Enterprises.
Both Airwork and The Helicopter Line have appealed on the grounds the judge/court had "erred in fact and in law''.
Copies of both appeals were obtained by the ODT last week.
Heli Holdings leased eight helicopters to The Helicopter Line for 20 years and was responsible for their maintenance from a Queenstown depot.
The contract was to run from 2002 to 2022, but The Helicopter Line quit the lease in July 2013.
The Helicopter Line cited 24 safety-related incidents, spanning 2008-13, some of which were described by an engineer in the High Court as exposing passengers, crew and aircraft to an unacceptably high risk.
While Heli Holdings sought $16.2 million over a shortfall in the hours the choppers should have been flown and profits lost after The Helicopter Line quit the lease, the High Court found in May The Helicopter Line had to pay $2 million, plus unspecified costs, which left about $14 million outstanding on Heli Holdings' claim.
Heli Holdings' appeal against Judge Gerald Nation's High Court judgement is over its claim for shortfall hours with loss of profits since July 2013, plus another finding where he ruled out The Helicopter Line pilot error being the cause of an engine overheating and subsequent engine damage.
Heli Holdings will argue 12 points of Judge Nation's findings, largely around contractual obligations within the 2002 agreement.
One point Heli Holdings made, claiming the court had erred, was "in finding The Helicopter Line was absolved from liability to Heli Holdings under the 2002 agreement in respect of shortfall hours and damages.''
Heli Holdings is seeking judgement against The Helicopter Line over the shortfall of hours, loss of profits and the engine overheating claim, plus costs.
The "cross-appeal'' subsequently filed to the Court of Appeal by The Helicopter Line raises 10 points as grounds for appeal, noting High Court findings in support that the relationship had broken down and there were genuine safety issues.
"Overall, the steps taken by The Helicopter Line were sufficient to constitute cancellation by conduct, contrary to the [High] Court's conclusion,'' The Helicopter Line said.
The Court of Appeal judgement sought by The Helicopter Line is a declaration that it validly cancelled the contract, prior to written notice, and an order to set aside the earlier High Court conclusion over issues of contractual entitlement, plus costs.
A date is yet to be set for a hearing.
