New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Mortgages

Legal area

Court

7 Mar 2022

AOKAUTERE LAND HOLDINGS LIMITED v TURVEY [2022] NZHC 375

Citation

[2022] NZHC 375
Court

High Court

An interim injunction restraining the defendant from appointing a receiver or exercising mortgagee power of sale was appropriate where the plaintiff had paid the assessed balance of the assigned loan, sought transfer under ss 102-103 Property Law Act 2007, and the defendant consented; the orders preserve the status quo pending substantive determination, with leave reserved for variation.
13 Sept 2018

Re an application by Bowler [2018] NZHC 2417

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2417
Court

High Court

The mortgage was held on trust for the applicant and s 52(1)(b)(iv) Trustee Act 1956 authorises the Court to vest the mortgage in him; leave to commence by originating application under r 19.5 is appropriate and the mortgage B495050.3 is vested in Patrick Christopher Bowler.
19 Dec 2014

ANNIK NEW PLYMOUTH LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v ANNIK INVESTMENTS LIMITED [2014] NZHC 3372

Citation

[2014] NZHC 3372
Court

High Court

A without‑notice freezing order limited to the two identified properties was justified because the plaintiff in liquidation demonstrated a good arguable claim against the defendant and a real risk of dissipation evidenced by active marketing of property and the registration of large second mortgages by the defendant's directors; the order was limited to protect the first mortgagee and to permit legitimate transactions, and disclosure by the defendant's directors was required to inform ongoing protection of creditors.
9 Feb 2012

PLATEAU FARMS LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP AND LIQUIDATION) V ELIZABETH MARY LAMBERT HC ROT CIV-2012-419-93

Citation

openlaw-b8582e56_8175_413f_9b28_914dc5e71e1e.pdf
Court

High Court

Ms Lambert's agreements were entered into after Westpac's registered mortgages and after the receivers' agreement with the purchaser; her purported interests are therefore subordinate and do not constitute a caveatable interest that can defeat the purchasers' equitable interests or the mortgagee's priority, and there was no mortgagee consent or capacity to redeem the debt by the transactions she relied on; consequently all caveats are removed and costs awarded against her.
19 Aug 2010

BARTHOLOMEW AND ORS V MARIMA VALLEY FARM LIMITED HC WN CIV-2010-454-373

Citation

openlaw-e8842bef_a69d_4b09_96f3_c903412e6436.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court declined to order immediate settlement and instead refrained from directing settlement until 5pm on 9 September 2010, on the condition that the appellant give an undertaking as to damages, secure that undertaking by holding its additional 8,395 Fonterra shares to cover any additional grazing, care and milking costs incurred by the respondent as a result of the appeal, and give the undertaking by 12 noon on 20 August 2010; the Court found the shares an adequate interim security given the proximate Court of Appeal fixture and disputed figures for interim exposure.
9 Jul 2009

KUMAR V LUCINA INVESTMENTS LIMITED HC AK CIV 2009-404-002118

Citation

openlaw-437d4020_5560_44bf_974e_9880f7d75e25.pdf
Court

High Court

The application to recall was dismissed because the applicants sought to raise a new factual and contractual basis not pleaded at trial, the evidence did not establish the alleged agreed amendment to the term loan agreement, and the exceptional grounds for recall under Horowhenua County were not met; accordingly Lucina remains entitled to indemnity costs under the mortgage.

New Zealand Case Law

AOKAUTERE LAND HOLDINGS LIMITED v TURVEY [2022] NZHC 375

Re an application by Bowler [2018] NZHC 2417

ANNIK NEW PLYMOUTH LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v ANNIK INVESTMENTS LIMITED [2014] NZHC 3372

PLATEAU FARMS LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP AND LIQUIDATION) V ELIZABETH MARY LAMBERT HC ROT CIV-2012-419-93

BARTHOLOMEW AND ORS V MARIMA VALLEY FARM LIMITED HC WN CIV-2010-454-373

KUMAR V LUCINA INVESTMENTS LIMITED HC AK CIV 2009-404-002118