SAMSON CORPORATION LTD v RYAN INVESTMENT GROUP LTD [2019] NZHC 3036

SAMSON CORPORATION LTD v RYAN INVESTMENT GROUP LTD [2019] NZHC 3036

The application to shorten time under r 12.7 was dismissed because the asserted factors (inability to re-let due to defendants' occupation and perceived narrowing of issues) did not constitute the very special or genuinely urgent circumstances required to abridge mandatory service periods; the absence of a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] NZHC 3036
Parties
Plaintiff: Samson Corporation Limited; First Defendant: Ryan Investment Group Limited; Second Defendant: Aditya Sudan; Third Defendant: Kanika Sudan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
20 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Summary Judgment and to Shorten Time / Application and Directions Prior to Listing
Outcome
Application to shorten time under r 12.7 dismissed; summary judgment application not determined on the merits
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Service of Proceedings, Shortening Time, Possession, Unlawful Occupation
Civil Procedure Property Law Landlord and Tenant Commercial Leasing Summary Judgment Service of Proceedings Shortening Time Possession +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samson Corporation Limited

Plaintiff

Ryan Investment Group Limited

First Defendant

Aditya Sudan

Second Defendant

Kanika Sudan

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Summary Judgment and to Shorten Time / Application and Directions Prior to Listing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the time for service under r 12.7 High Court Rules 2016 should be shortened
  2. 2 Whether the facts asserted (defendants in unlawful possession preventing re-letting; narrow issues) amount to urgency or special circumstances to justify abridgement
  3. 3 Whether an ex parte or abridged application requires a supporting memorandum and adequate notice to the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The application to shorten time under r 12.7 was dismissed because the asserted factors (inability to re-let due to defendants' occupation and perceived narrowing of issues) did not constitute the very special or genuinely urgent circumstances required to abridge mandatory service periods; the absence of a supporting memorandum for an ex parte abridgement reinforced refusal.

Court Disposition

Application to shorten time under r 12.7 dismissed; summary judgment application not determined on the merits

Orders

  • Application to shorten time under r 12.7 dismissed