Neville is a senior Partner at Rice Craig and heads the Litigation team.

‘Whether representing for a simple or complex matters you can trust you’ll get solid, up front legal advice and fearless advocacy in court.’

A sought-after specialist in civil litigation and dispute resolution, he has represented this practice for over 25 years, proudly serving the South Auckland community throughout his career.

Neville regularly provides advocacy at all levels of Court including District Court, High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.  He acts on a broad range of matters from drink driving charges and complex civil cases such as large constructive trust claims and judicial reviews.  He is a straight-shooter, and clients can expect expert guidance and personalised service every step of the process.

Neville can provide a superior level of representation in law and litigation through his breadth of expertise and his broad skill set.  His work is specialised and sharply focused on developing successful strategies that win in and out of court.  He regularly appears in court and is skilled in cross examination.  Whether acting in mediation or court advocacy, his depth of experience in civil litigation in the South Auckland district is unrivalled.

Neville doesn’t shy away from delivering a difficult message, and is trusted for his straight up, realistic and determined approach to his practice.  He is astute and likeable, and if you choose to work with Neville he will speak to you in simple terms, drawing on his wisdom and significant experience to provide you with clarity, advice and representation.

Neville enjoys working with his team, which includes PAs, juniors, and staff solicitors.  Due to the dynamic nature of his work, he often overlaps with other areas of law and works directly with other Rice Craig partners.

Neville is deeply committed to the families and businesses of the South Auckland community.

Short list of recent cases

• G Bains v H Singh [2024] NZCA 581 – instructing solicitor in relation to determination by Court of Appeal regarding extent of qualified privilege and honest opinion defences.
• R v K [2025] NZHC 794 – Justice Jagose – appeal against refusal to grant bail variation – consideration of “fresh evidence” related to family harm reports.
• Singh v Singh – Calvary Indian Assembly of God [2025] NZHC 364 – judicial review – powers to remove trustees.
• Keir v Simms [2024] NZHC 2816 – AJ Gardiner – Complex constructive trust claim – discovery applications and other matters.
• Halliday v Hannah & Others [2022] NZHC 2066 – A J Sussock – Application for Summary Judgment with Plaintiff alleging breach of trust and successfully obtaining Judgment [2024] NZHC 1747.
• Shaw v IAG New Zealand Limited [2022] NZDC9003 – Summary Judgment Application against Insurer for loss of motor home to Estate and on appeal upheld [2022] NZHC 2829, Woolford J.
• Singh v Singh [2024] NZHC 2685 – Judicial Review Hearing – interlocutory exchanges.
• Tarr v Rogers [2023] NZFC 8215  – Estate matters – consideration of DNA implications in paternity applications.
• Salman Ali v Bano & Others [2022] NZDC17377 – Application for Summary Judgment by Defendant relating to alleged breach of Agreement for Sale and Purchase.
• Seabrook v Draiocht Trust Partnership Limited [2021] NZHC 2554  Successful claim to Sell Up Land Jointly owned following estate issues. Consideration of trustee duties and responsibilities.

List of 5 legally significant cases

• Clement v Lucas [2018] NZHC 1799 Justice Van Bohemen; [2017]  NZHC 3278 – leading authority in Trustee discretions, cited in “The Law of Trusts” Ford & Lee, Westlaw “Introduction to the Trust Act 2019” and elsewhere.
• Tarr v Rogers [2023] NZFC 8215 – leading authority in putative father paternity cases and DNA usage and inordinate delay. Cited in Westlaw “Childlaw” regarding The Status of Children Act 1969.
• Schmidt v Hair [2015] NZSC 20, Supreme Court decision regarding indefeasibility of title, and appellant jurisdiction to the Supreme Court, cited on over 4000 occasions and multiple secondary sources including “New Zealand Land Law” and other texts.
• Hotchin v Sheppard [2013] NZHC 960 – $10 million defamation case involving Hanover Finance.
• Opai v AG [2017] NZHC  1036; [2017] NZHC 668 – establishing new “de minimis” test in defamation law.

Other cases of recorded significance

• Click to view more: Recent Cases

Background

Neville graduated from Auckland University in 1995 at a young age and commenced practice at Rice Craig.

He is proud of Rice Craig’s history and commitment to excellence which has served the South Auckland community for a century.  He works closely with Rani, and believes his own success in civil litigation is complimented by his dedicated team including a longstanding PA, Christelle.

Neville enjoys the collegial nature at the firm as well as the long-standing relationships with the other partners at Rice Craig, and mentoring roles.

Outside interests

An avid runner, Neville brings his super competitive nature to his sport – challenging himself with distance cross country running and has qualified for the Boston marathon.

A proud sixth generation Aucklander, Neville enjoys travelling and tramping in New Zealand’s backcountry with his family.