New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Court undertakings

Legal area

Court

3 Sept 2018

Vickery v Thoroughgood [2018] NZHC 2303

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2303
Court

High Court

The High Court concluded the District Court did not err: independent expert evidence and the respondents' undertaking to continue trimming to a stringline removed any 'undue' obstruction of the appellants' easterly view and did not establish an undue interference with wifi; therefore the threshold in s 335(1)(b) was not met and a comparative hardship assessment under s 335(1)(c) was unnecessary, so the appeal was dismissed.
19 Jul 2018

EDWARDS v MSD Judgment No 2 [2018] NZHC 1792

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1792
Court

High Court

The court granted discharge under s 106 because the applicant presented a realistic, supported repayment plan (four years) and undertook to pay at least 20% of net post-tax income, with acceptance by Work and Income and the respondent, which satisfied the court that full reparation would be repaid within a reasonable period.
15 Jan 2015

EAGLE & ORS [2016] NZHC 10

Citation

[2016] NZHC 10
Court

High Court

The court granted extensions of the statutory employment notice periods to 18 July 2016 to enable sale of the business as a going concern, and rejected limiting the receivers' protection to guaranteed rent only by requiring the receivers to meet all periodic outgoings payable under existing leases; the receivers' formal undertaking to meet those outgoings was approved and ordered to be annexed to the sealed orders and to take effect upon signature by the receiver.
10 Apr 2013

HART & ORS V ANZ BANK NEW ZEALAND LIMITED COA CA729/2012

Citation

COA CA729/2012
Court

Court of Appeal

The Official Assignee's memorandum of 11 March 2013, signed by counsel, met the requirements of r 44 of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 and therefore constituted a valid abandonment by each appellant; the abandonment terminated the appeals, leaving no basis to adjourn or grant a stay, and requiring release of the Bank from its undertaking.
27 Mar 2013

KARAKA V NGAI TAI KI TAMAKI TRIBAL TRUST HC AK CIV-2011-404-7664

Citation

openlaw-fed6de27_bb2e_4b1b_9d24_011184992339.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court declined to remove Emily Karaka and Deborah Pace as trustees; it found the Trust was irregularly operated during the exclusion period but would not declare the AIP void in proceedings to which the Crown was not a party; the Deed of Mandate does not prevent immediate removal of negotiators by trustee resolution (subject to iwi appeal), and the majority trustees, although having acted improperly in several respects, should not be removed immediately because that would paralyse the Trust. Instead the Court ordered a clean‑sweep trustee election by 31 July 2013 with all trustees removed…
12 Jul 2012

TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LTD V PERPETUAL TRUST LTD HC AK CIV 2012-404-3569

Citation

openlaw-2d7773c7_7874_4dbf_8985_f47d5f7936ac.pdf
Court

High Court

Because the statutory supervisor formed an opinion of significant risk of material prejudice to security holders and market confidence, the Court made interim protective orders: appointed two named Observers with access and oversight powers limited to the two funds, required independent valuations of charged properties to be filed by set dates, accepted and recorded undertakings from Perpetual that restrict asset dealings and require reporting, and confirmed a moratorium on Mortgage Fund redemptions; these measures were necessary and proportionate pending a substantive hearing on 2–3 August 2…

New Zealand Case Law

Vickery v Thoroughgood [2018] NZHC 2303

EDWARDS v MSD Judgment No 2 [2018] NZHC 1792

EAGLE & ORS [2016] NZHC 10

HART & ORS V ANZ BANK NEW ZEALAND LIMITED COA CA729/2012

KARAKA V NGAI TAI KI TAMAKI TRIBAL TRUST HC AK CIV-2011-404-7664

TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LTD V PERPETUAL TRUST LTD HC AK CIV 2012-404-3569