One of the less understood geotechnical responses to the cyclic loading from the MW6.2 Christchurch Earthquake, on the 22nd of February 2011, is the fissuring in the loessial soil-mantled, footslope positions of the north-facing valleys of the Port Hills. The fissures are characterized by mostly horizontal offset (≤500mm), with minor vertical displacement (≤300mm), and they extend along both sides of valleys for several hundred metres in an approximately contour-parallel orientation. The fissure traces correspond to extensional features mapped in other studies. Previous studies have suggested that the fissures are the headscarps of incipient landslides, but the surface and subsurface features are not typical of landslide movement. Whilst there are some features that correlate with landslide movement, there are many features that contradict the landslide movement hypothesis. Of critical importance to this investigation was the fact that there are no landslide flanks, there has been no basal shear surface found, there is little deformation in the so-called ‘landslide body’, and there have been no recorded zones of low shear strength in the soil deposit that are indicative of a basal shear surface. This thesis is a detailed geotechnical study on the fissures along part of Ramahana Road in the Hillsborough Valley, Christchurch. Shallow and deep investigation methods found that the predominant soil is loess-colluvium, to depths of ~20m, and this soil has variable geotechnical characteristics depending on the layer sampled. The factor that has the most influence on shear strength was found to be the moisture content. Direct shear-box testing of disturbed, recompacted loess-colluvium found that the soil had a cohesion of 35-65kPa and a friction angle of 38-43° when the soil moisture content was at 8-10%. However when the moisture content was at 19-20% the soil’s cohesion decreased to 3-5kPa and its friction angle decreased to 33-38°, this moisture content is at or slightly above the plastic limit. An electrical resistivity geophysical survey was conducted perpendicular to multiple fissure traces and through the compressional zone at 17 Ramahana Road. The electrical resistivity line found that there was an area of high resistivity at the toe of the slope, and an area of high conductivity downslope of this and at greater depths. This area correlated to the compressional zone recorded by previous studies. Moisture content testing of the soil in these locations showed that the soil in the resistive area was relatively dry (9%) compared to the surrounding soil (13%), whilst the soil in the conductive area was relatively wet (22%)compared to the surrounding soil (19%). Density tests of the soil in the compressional zone recorded that the resistive area had a higher dry density than the surrounding soil (~1790 kg/m3 compared to ~1650 kg/m3). New springs arose downslope of the compressional zone contemporaneously with the fissures, and it is interpreted that these have arisen from increased hydraulic head in the Banks Peninsula bedrock aquifer system, and earthquake induced-bedrock fracturing. A test pit was dug across an infilled fissure trace at 17 Ramahana Road to a depth of 3m. The fissure trace had an aperture of 450-470mm at the ground surface, but it gradually lost aperture with depth until 2.0-2.1m where it became a segmented fissure trace with 1-2mm aperture. A mixed-colluvium layer was intercepted by the fissure trace at 2.4m depth, and there was no observable vertical offset of this layer. The fissure trace was at an angle of 78° at the ground surface, but it also flattened with depth, which gave it a slightly curved appearance. The fissure trace was at an assumed angle of 40-50° near the base of the test pit. Rotational slide, translational slide and lateral spread landslide movement types were compared and contrasted as possibilities for landslide movement types, whilst an alternative hypothesis was offered that the fissures are tensile failures with a quasi-toppling motion involving a cohesive block of loessial soil moving outwards from the slope, with an accommodating compressional strain in the lower less cohesive soil. The mechanisms behind this movement are suggested to be the horizontal earthquake inertia forces from the Christchurch Earthquake, the static shear stress of the slope, and bedrock uplift of the Port Hills in relation to the subsidence of the Christchurch city flatlands. Extremely high PGA is considered to be a prerequisite to the fissure trace development, and these can only be induced in the Hillsborough Valley from a Port Hills Fault rupture, which has a recurrence interval of ~10,000 years. The current understanding of how the loess-colluvium soil would behave under cyclic loading is limited, and the mechanisms behind the suggested movement type are not completely understood. Further research is needed to confirm the proposed mechanism of the fissure traces. Laboratory tests such as the cyclic triaxial and cyclic shear test would be beneficial in future research to quantitatively test how the soil behaves under cyclic loading at various moisture contents and clay contents, and centrifuge experiments would be of great use to qualitatively test the suggested mode of movement in the loessial soil.
In September 2010 and February 2011 the Canterbury region of New Zealand was struck by two powerful earthquakes, registering magnitude 7.1 and 6.3 respectively on the Richter scale. The second earthquake was centred 10 kilometres south-east of the centre of Christchurch (the region’s capital and New Zealand’s third most populous urban area, with approximately 360,000 residents) at a depth of five kilometres. 185 people were killed, making it the second deadliest natural disaster in New Zealand’s history. (66 people were killed in the collapse of one building alone, the six-storey Canterbury Television building.) The earthquake occurred during the lunch hour, increasing the number of people killed on footpaths and in buses and cars by falling debris. In addition to the loss of life, the earthquake caused catastrophic damage to both land and buildings in Christchurch, particularly in the central business district. Many commercial and residential buildings collapsed in the tremors; others were damaged through soil liquefaction and surface flooding. Over 1,000 buildings in the central business district were eventually demolished because of safety concerns, and an estimated 70,000 people had to leave the city after the earthquakes because their homes were uninhabitable. The New Zealand Government declared a state of national emergency, which stayed in force for ten weeks. In 2014 the Government estimated that the rebuild process would cost NZ$40 billion (approximately US$27.3 billion, a cost equivalent to 17% of New Zealand’s annual GDP). Economists now estimate it could take the New Zealand economy between 50 and 100 years to recover. The earthquakes generated tens of thousands of insurance claims, both against private home insurance companies and against the New Zealand Earthquake Commission, a government-owned statutory body which provides primary natural disaster insurance to residential property owners in New Zealand. These ranged from claims for hundreds of millions of dollars concerning the local port and university to much smaller claims in respect of the thousands of residential homes damaged. Many of these insurance claims resulted in civil proceedings, caused by disputes about policy cover, the extent of the damage and the cost and/or methodology of repairs, as well as failures in communication and delays caused by the overwhelming number of claims. Disputes were complicated by the fact that the Earthquake Commission provides primary insurance cover up to a monetary cap, with any additional costs to be met by the property owner’s private insurer. Litigation funders and non-lawyer claims advocates who took a percentage of any insurance proceeds also soon became involved. These two factors increased the number of parties involved in any given claim and introduced further obstacles to resolution. Resolving these disputes both efficiently and fairly was (and remains) central to the rebuild process. This created an unprecedented challenge for the justice system in Christchurch (and New Zealand), exacerbated by the fact that the Christchurch High Court building was itself damaged in the earthquakes, with the Court having to relocate to temporary premises. (The High Court hears civil claims exceeding NZ$200,000 in value (approximately US$140,000) or those involving particularly complex issues. Most of the claims fell into this category.) This paper will examine the response of the Christchurch High Court to this extraordinary situation as a case study in innovative judging practices and from a jurisprudential perspective. In 2011, following the earthquakes, the High Court made a commitment that earthquake-related civil claims would be dealt with as swiftly as the Court's resources permitted. In May 2012, it commenced a special “Earthquake List” to manage these cases. The list (which is ongoing) seeks to streamline the trial process, resolve quickly claims with precedent value or involving acute personal hardship or large numbers of people, facilitate settlement and generally work proactively and innovatively with local lawyers, technical experts and other stakeholders. For example, the Court maintains a public list (in spreadsheet format, available online) with details of all active cases before the Court, listing the parties and their lawyers, summarising the facts and identifying the legal issues raised. It identifies cases in which issues of general importance have been or will be decided, with the expressed purpose being to assist earthquake litigants and those contemplating litigation and to facilitate communication among parties and lawyers. This paper will posit the Earthquake List as an attempt to implement innovative judging techniques to provide efficient yet just legal processes, and which can be examined from a variety of jurisprudential perspectives. One of these is as a case study in the well-established debate about the dialogic relationship between public decisions and private settlement in the rule of law. Drawing on the work of scholars such as Hazel Genn, Owen Fiss, David Luban, Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Judith Resnik, it will explore the tension between the need to develop the law through the doctrine of precedent and the need to resolve civil disputes fairly, affordably and expeditiously. It will also be informed by the presenter’s personal experience of the interplay between reported decisions and private settlement in post-earthquake Christchurch through her work mediating insurance disputes. From a methodological perspective, this research project itself gives rise to issues suitable for discussion at the Law and Society Annual Meeting. These include the challenges in empirical study of judges, working with data collected by the courts and statistical analysis of the legal process in reference to settlement. September 2015 marked the five-year anniversary of the first Christchurch earthquake. There remains widespread dissatisfaction amongst Christchurch residents with the ongoing delays in resolving claims, particularly insurers, and the rebuild process. There will continue to be challenges in Christchurch for years to come, both from as-yet unresolved claims but also because of the possibility of a new wave of claims arising from poor quality repairs. Thus, a final purpose of presenting this paper at the 2016 Meeting is to gain the benefit of other scholarly perspectives and experiences of innovative judging best practice, with a view to strengthening and improving the judicial processes in Christchurch. This Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association in New Orleans is a particularly appropriate forum for this paper, given the recent ten year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina and the plenary session theme of “Natural and Unnatural Disasters – human crises and law’s response.” The presenter has a personal connection with this theme, as she was a Fulbright scholar from New Zealand at New York University in 2005/2006 and participated in the student volunteer cleanup effort in New Orleans following Katrina. http://www.lawandsociety.org/NewOrleans2016/docs/2016_Program.pdf
