New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Gst treatment

Legal area

Court

15 Dec 2023

QI v LIANG [2023] NZHC 442

Citation

[2023] NZHC 442
Court

High Court

Defendant received the funds and accepted an obligation to repay, the agreement between the parties was cancelled due to breakdown in relationship/repudiation, but because the plaintiffs' pleaded claim sought accelerated recovery of future instalments (a damages claim in substance) and GST treatment of rent created a real issue as to quantification, summary judgment was appropriate only in part: judgment entered for $65,432.00 representing rent net of GST plus outgoings, with the balance of the claim declined.
24 Aug 2023

EASTERNMANOR DEVELOPMENT LIMITED v YESHE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED [2023] NZHC 2317

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2317
Court

High Court

Summary judgment granted for Easternmanor Development Limited. The Acanthus–EDL contractual restrictions on on-sale and marketing did not render the EDL–Yeshe contracts invalid and did not provide Yeshe an arguable defence. Post-contract WeChat communications did not establish a Fair Trading Act defence because they were post-contract and there was no demonstrated reliance causing Yeshe's conduct. Yeshe's removal from the Companies Register prevented settlement; loss is assessed at the date of cancellation; GST should be excluded from damages because a completed settlement would have been zer…
4 May 2021

ZHOU v PACIFIC PEARL ACCOMMODATION LIMITED [2021] NZHC 969

Citation

[2021] NZHC 969
Court

High Court

The Court refused to recall the judgment; held Pacific Pearl entitled to costs on a 2B basis; Pacific Pearl's non-payment of legal costs of approximately NZD 5,747 was not sufficiently serious to justify lease cancellation given the broader disputed allegations and procedural history; disallowed the claim for costs on costs and a specific unexplained disbursement (Noel King); awarded costs of NZD 11,472 and disbursements of NZD 17,179.34 to Pacific Pearl, GST treatment to be resolved under GST law.
7 Aug 2020

JIANG v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND EMPLOYMENT [2020] NZHC 1974

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1974
Court

High Court

Because the parties had agreed costs should be categorised as 2B, the applicants did not oppose the application, and the sum claimed corresponded to scale costs which are GST neutral, the respondent was entitled to judgment for costs on a 2B basis in the sum of $17,686.
10 Oct 2019

SMITH & SONS SI LIMITED v SEAR [2019] NZHC 2573

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2573
Court

High Court

Judgment from 2 September 2019 is confirmed with specified GST-exclusive adjustments (signage $340 and $750.43), the total judgment is $39,198.97 reduced by $5.00 (to $39,193.97); the plaintiff is entitled to proceedings costs and disbursements of $32,630.50 excluding GST; the defendants overstated a service disbursement by $5.00 and the plaintiff must adjust interest figures accordingly before the Registrar will seal interest judgment.
7 Mar 2017

BODY CORPORATE 346799 v KNZ INTERNATIONAL CO LIMITED [2017] NZHC 511

Citation

[2017] NZHC 511
Court

High Court

The Court found KNZ (developer) and Multiplex (head contractor) each liable for the cladding, balcony, podium and passive fire protection defects by breaching non-delegable and/or independent duties of care, dismissed KNZ's limitation and contributory negligence defences for lack of evidence, accepted plaintiffs' quantum for remedial costs, consequential losses and general damages in the amounts assessed, apportioned liability 85% to KNZ and Multiplex and 15% to Auckland City Council, and granted the Council contribution judgment for 85% of its settlement from KNZ and Multiplex together with…
20 Dec 2016

Vivian v Kellerman [2016] NZHC 3163

Citation

[2016] NZHC 3163
Court

High Court

The High Court upheld the Family Court's exercise of its s182 discretion to vary the nuptial trust and allocate an equal share of the Woolston property to the wife because the Trust was settled for the family home and the children's interests were adequately protected by ensuring both parents were financially enabled; absent explicit deed clauses removing fiduciary constraints, the Court would not definitively classify the husband's trustee powers as relationship property on Clayton's basis; valuation and calculations by the Family Court were correct except for a discrete EQC/carpet adjustmen…
9 Nov 2012

SAYES v TAMATEKAPUA COA CA181/2011

Citation

COA CA181/2011
Court

Court of Appeal

The deed required valuation of 'current market value' by the nominated valuer Seagar & Partners; Seagar & Partners valued the property at $4,311,000 excluding GST and there was no challenge to that valuation; market value is determined by a hypothetical willing vendor/purchaser and does not vary with the GST status of an actual beneficiary or hypothetical purchaser; therefore the correct valuation under the deed is GST exclusive $4,311,000 and the appeal is dismissed.
3 Apr 2012

LONG V ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED COA CA708/2011

Citation

COA CA708/2011
Court

Court of Appeal

Undisputed evidence established the bank engaged a reputable agent, conducted adequate marketing and an auction, received the highest auction bid of $340,000 and thereafter achieved a negotiated sale at $415,000 inclusive of GST; those steps satisfied the duty in s176 and left no arguable defence, so summary judgment was properly entered.
22 Dec 2011

WESTPAC NEW ZEALAND LIMITED V SINGH HC AK CIV-2011-404-2434

Citation

openlaw-bd4c0c84_9235_46d9_8704_3fc62b012cc6.pdf
Court

High Court

Defendants raised no arguable defence: Westpac met its s176 duty by obtaining consistent valuations and reasonable marketing, the sale price lay within the expert valuation range, sale procedures were adequate and deductions correct; accordingly summary judgment is entered for Westpac for the amount claimed.