New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Building contract

Legal area

Court

23 Mar 2018

AMT LIFESTYLE HOMES LIMITED v FERNANDES & ANOR [2018] NZHC 520

Citation

[2018] NZHC 520
Court

High Court

Even accepting AMT may have an arguable claim, significant factual disputes exist about whether the contract remained enforceable and whether invoiced charges fell within the contract (notably non-building items such as sales commission and copyrite); the proper forum to adjudicate the disputed debt and contractual issues is the District Court and in the exercise of discretion the High Court ordered removal of the caveat.
19 Feb 2010

CLAVERDON DEVELOPMENTS LTD V HOUSING NEW ZEALAND LTD HC AK CIV-2009-404-007159

Citation

openlaw-68b0bbaf_cc98_4875_8a3b_1b56324f266f.pdf
Court

High Court

Claverdon did not establish a caveatable interest: the agreements transferred title to HNZ without reserving proprietary rights, a builder/contractor or unpaid creditor does not acquire a registerable interest in the land, and resource consents attach to the owner; the caveat also failed to specify the nature of the estate claimed, therefore the caveat must be removed.
30 Aug 2006

SUMMER CONSTRUCTION LIMITED V LEON BAKKER AND DEIRDRE BAKKER HC WN CIV-2006-485-1499

Citation

openlaw-f0719f34_41bd_4fa8_93fa_8ac8920747af.pdf
Court

High Court

The applicant established a reasonably arguable counterclaim closely linked to the disputed deposit by adducing evidence that a binding building contract existed and was repudiated by the respondents, and that the counterclaim exceeded the $10,968.75 deposit; accordingly the statutory demand dated 29 June 2006 was set aside under s290(4)(b).

New Zealand Case Law

AMT LIFESTYLE HOMES LIMITED v FERNANDES & ANOR [2018] NZHC 520

CLAVERDON DEVELOPMENTS LTD V HOUSING NEW ZEALAND LTD HC AK CIV-2009-404-007159

SUMMER CONSTRUCTION LIMITED V LEON BAKKER AND DEIRDRE BAKKER HC WN CIV-2006-485-1499