KEVIN DAVID CARLIN, AS TRUSTEE OF THE KEVIN CARLIN QUEENSLAND TRUST V PAUL ALBERT ARTHUR DOLHEGUY, CLAIRE BERNIE DOLHEGUY AND RICHARD HENRY DIGBY NEAVE, AS TRUSTEES OF THE PAA DOLHEGUY FAMILY TRUST HC CHCH CIV-2009-409-002082
The consent notice's maintenance obligations materially and detrimentally affected an owner's enjoyment of lot 14 and, because those obligations were not known or reasonably discoverable by the purchasers before contracting, the purchasers had reasonable grounds under clause 19 to cancel; by contrast, the landscape alterations (removal of two maytenus trees and limited shrub removal) did not give reasonable grounds for cancellation under clause 22; accordingly the purchasers' cancellation is upheld and the plaintiff's claim for specific performance fails.
- Citation
- openlaw-1ed86be6_0601_4f0b_bd9e_7594c76c31f1.pdf
- Parties
- Plaintiff/vendor: KEVIN DAVID CARLIN, AS TRUSTEE OF THE KEVIN CARLIN QUEENSLAND TRUST; Defendants/purchasers: PAUL ALBERT ARTHUR DOLHEGUY; CLAIRE BERNIE DOLHEGUY; RICHARD HENRY DIGBY NEAVE, AS TRUSTEES OF THE PAA DOLHEGUY FAMILY TRUST
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 12 May 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Specific Performance of Sale and Purchase Agreement / Final Judgment at Trial
- Outcome
- Defendants' cancellation upheld; plaintiff's claim for specific performance dismissed; judgment for defendants
- Legal Topics
- Specific Performance, Contract Cancellation for Detrimental Encumbrance, Consent Notice / Encumbrance Running With the Land, Notice (actual and Constructive), Interpretation of Contractual 'detriment' Test, Valuation of Land Impact
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
KEVIN DAVID CARLIN, AS TRUSTEE OF THE KEVIN CARLIN QUEENSLAND TRUST
Plaintiff/vendor
PAUL ALBERT ARTHUR DOLHEGUY; CLAIRE BERNIE DOLHEGUY; RICHARD HENRY DIGBY NEAVE, AS TRUSTEES OF THE PAA DOLHEGUY FAMILY TRUST
Defendants/purchasers
Procedural Posture
Specific Performance of Sale and Purchase Agreement / Final Judgment at Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether landscape alterations to the western boundary detrimentally affected value or use sufficient to justify cancellation under cl 22
- 2 Whether a consent notice imposing maintenance obligations detrimentally affected value or use sufficient to justify cancellation under cl 19
- 3 Whether the purchasers had actual or constructive notice of the Deed (and thus the likely consent notice) when contracting
Ratio Decidendi
The consent notice's maintenance obligations materially and detrimentally affected an owner's enjoyment of lot 14 and, because those obligations were not known or reasonably discoverable by the purchasers before contracting, the purchasers had reasonable grounds under clause 19 to cancel; by contrast, the landscape alterations (removal of two maytenus trees and limited shrub removal) did not give reasonable grounds for cancellation under clause 22; accordingly the purchasers' cancellation is upheld and the plaintiff's claim for specific performance fails.
Court Disposition
Defendants' cancellation upheld; plaintiff's claim for specific performance dismissed; judgment for defendants
Orders
- Judgment for defendants upholding their cancellation of the contract
- Plaintiff's claim for specific performance dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment