CHAN & OR v BOSTON TRUSTEES 6037 LTD & ORS [2021] NZHC 1694

CHAN & OR v BOSTON TRUSTEES 6037 LTD & ORS [2021] NZHC 1694

The amended statement of claim discloses no reasonably arguable cause of action: the defendants had performed their completion obligations and were ready to settle, the plaintiffs failed to pay the purchase price and could not rely on cl 5 warranties to prevent completion or to compel undertakings; therefore strike out was appropriate under r 15.1.

Citation
[2021] NZHC 1694
Parties
First Plaintiff: Evelyn Dreami Chan, as trustee of the Dreami Trust; Second Plaintiff: Evelyn Dreami Chan; First Defendants: Boston Trustees 6037 Limited and Kwok Ping Winnie Chan, as trustees of the KP Chan Family Trust; Second Defendant: Kwok Ping Winnie Chan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
8 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Contract Sale of Shares / Specific Performance / Interlocutory Strike Out Application
Outcome
Proceedings struck out
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Warranties, Contract Interpretation, Completion/settlement Obligations, Strike Out Under R 15.1 High Court Rules
Contract Equity Civil Procedure Property Specific Performance Warranties Contract Interpretation Completion/settlement Obligations +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evelyn Dreami Chan, as trustee of the Dreami Trust

First Plaintiff

Evelyn Dreami Chan

Second Plaintiff

Boston Trustees 6037 Limited and Kwok Ping Winnie Chan, as trustees of the KP Chan Family Trust

First Defendants

Kwok Ping Winnie Chan

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract Sale of Shares / Specific Performance / Interlocutory Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended statement of claim discloses a reasonably arguable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the defendants breached the agreement for sale and purchase (ASP) by failing to settle or issue a valid settlement notice
  3. 3 Whether warranties in cl 5 obliged the vendors to pay audit costs and whether that would prevent completion

Ratio Decidendi

The amended statement of claim discloses no reasonably arguable cause of action: the defendants had performed their completion obligations and were ready to settle, the plaintiffs failed to pay the purchase price and could not rely on cl 5 warranties to prevent completion or to compel undertakings; therefore strike out was appropriate under r 15.1.

Court Disposition

Proceedings struck out

Orders

  • Defendants' application to strike out the amended statement of claim granted
  • Proceedings struck out