GULLEY v PAYLESS SPORTS CARS LIMITED [2018] NZHC 1359

GULLEY v PAYLESS SPORTS CARS LIMITED [2018] NZHC 1359

Defendants breached the lease and failed to remedy defaults after notices under the Property Law Act 2007; no defence was filed; accordingly the plaintiffs were entitled to possession, cancellation of the lease, and judgment for rent, outgoings, interest and contractual legal and court costs, and no order was made for unquantified future compensation.

Citation
[2018] NZHC 1359
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: Patricia Ella Gulley; Plaintiff/applicant: Stephen John Gulley; First Defendant/first Respondent: Payless Sports Cars Limited; Second Defendant/second Respondent: Mohammed Usman also known as Ricky Kalam
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
8 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Property Law Act 2007 Proceedings Lease Enforcement and Possession / Judgment After Formal Proof Hearing
Outcome
Application granted in part: possession and cancellation of lease ordered; judgment for arrears, legal costs and court costs; no order for unquantified compensation.
Legal Topics
Possession, Lease Cancellation, Rent Arrears, Guarantee Enforcement, Costs Recovery
Property Law Contract Law Landlord and Tenant Law Possession Lease Cancellation Rent Arrears Guarantee Enforcement Costs Recovery

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patricia Ella Gulley

Plaintiff/applicant

Stephen John Gulley

Plaintiff/applicant

Payless Sports Cars Limited

First Defendant/first Respondent

Mohammed Usman also known as Ricky Kalam

Second Defendant/second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Property Law Act 2007 Proceedings Lease Enforcement and Possession / Judgment After Formal Proof Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs entitled to possession of Unit A, 13 Saleyards Road
  2. 2 Whether the lease dated 15 March 2013 should be cancelled for breach
  3. 3 Whether defendants must pay rent, outgoings, interest and costs under the lease

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants breached the lease and failed to remedy defaults after notices under the Property Law Act 2007; no defence was filed; accordingly the plaintiffs were entitled to possession, cancellation of the lease, and judgment for rent, outgoings, interest and contractual legal and court costs, and no order was made for unquantified future compensation.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part: possession and cancellation of lease ordered; judgment for arrears, legal costs and court costs; no order for unquantified compensation.

Orders

  • Order that the first defendant yield up possession of Unit A, 13 Saleyards Road, Otahuhu
  • Order that the deed of lease dated 15 March 2013 for Unit A and accessory Unit AU1 at 13 Saleyards Road (CT NA56D/742) is cancelled