New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Subdivision/resource consent

Legal area

Court

1 Jun 2022

SHAW v DIXON HOMES LTD [2022] NZHC 1271

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1271
Court

High Court

The applicants established a reasonably arguable case that the 2017 deed remains in force and that DHL's purported cancellation was not clearly valid; because contested factual issues (including whether DHL breached key obligations and the role of the surveyor) exist and are unsuitable for summary determination, the caveat must be maintained pending resolution of substantive proceedings, subject to the applicants continuing to prosecute their claims.
3 Dec 2014

VICTORIA ELIZABETH BETHELL as administrator of the estate of ROSS MCKAY BETHELL v CHRISTINE ANNE BETHELL [2014] NZSC 177

Citation

[2014] NZSC 177
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the case concerned interpretation of a one‑off deed with no issue of general or commercial importance and the lower courts had not erred in their approach to interpreting the deed in the particular circumstances.
10 Jul 2014

BOSWELL v OWEN ROSS MILLAR CA293/2013 [2014] NZCA 314

Citation

[2014] 3 NZLR 332
Court

Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed because on the evidence the respondent did not breach the settlement agreement (the duty to cooperate was met in context; the respondent pursued the application and appeal and could not be shown to have known it would fail), the appellant failed to prove causation or loss from asserted lack of cooperation, legal costs incurred in attempting to enforce or compromise claims are not recoverable as damages, the settlement was a compromise not a determination entitling set-off, and there was no demonstrated judicial bias; further evidence was not fresh and was excluded.
21 May 2007

JOONG SEOK KO AND YOUN JA KIM V P J H CHAMBERLAIN, K C GOLDSTONE, N J PORTER AND A J STEELE AND ORS HC AK CIV 2006-404-3279

Citation

openlaw-7656a408_6b75_46fc_91af_768d2fd5aa3b.pdf
Court

High Court

The court held that co-owners of cross-leased land remain entitled to the statutory right to partition; cross-lease titles and interlocking leasehold/freehold obligations do not of themselves oust the statutory right absent clear express contracting-out; accordingly the plaintiffs were entitled to an order declaring the court will order partition of the property, subject to the form of partition and the obtaining of requisite resource/subdivision consent, with matters of detailed form and value adjustments reserved for further proceedings.

New Zealand Case Law

SHAW v DIXON HOMES LTD [2022] NZHC 1271

VICTORIA ELIZABETH BETHELL as administrator of the estate of ROSS MCKAY BETHELL v CHRISTINE ANNE BETHELL [2014] NZSC 177

BOSWELL v OWEN ROSS MILLAR CA293/2013 [2014] NZCA 314

JOONG SEOK KO AND YOUN JA KIM V P J H CHAMBERLAIN, K C GOLDSTONE, N J PORTER AND A J STEELE AND ORS HC AK CIV 2006-404-3279