13 Jul 2022
KING v CLARKE [2022] NZHC 1649
- Citation
- [2022] NZHC 1649
- Court
- High Court
The DOFA and contemporaneous acknowledgment do not support implying a continuing right to occupy beyond the 12‑month period; implying such a term would contradict express contract terms and fail the strict necessity test; equitable estoppel not established on the undisputed facts; defendant is an unlawful occupier and summary judgment for possession is appropriate.