New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Summary judgment principles

Legal area

Court

3 Nov 2023

SENIOR TRUST CAPITAL LIMITED v HOLMES [2023] NZHC 3108

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3108
Court

High Court

Because the mortgagee sale process was not challenged and objectively tested the market producing an $18,000,000 sale after proper marketing, the Court found no breach of s176 or of an equitable duty of good faith; the earlier $22,000,000 contract was not shown to be alive at sale and key contractual differences (exclusion of two units, warranties and other terms) explained the price gap; the guarantee/loan contained a conclusive certificate clause and no manifest error appeared on the face of the certificate, and defendants failed to identify a reasonably arguable defence on quantum; therefo…
28 Jul 2023

PLUS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED v JL TRUSTEE NOMINEE LIMITED [2023] NZHC 1986

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1986
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was dismissed because the defendants established multiple arguable defences that raise real questions for trial: an arguable (non‑documentary) joint venture that could impose duties of loyalty on PCCL; arguable breaches (fund diversion, failure to maintain bond/support) giving rise to set-off and counterclaims; arguable tort claims for interference with contractual relations and knowing receipt of misapplied funds; and an arguable restriction on PCCL's ability to enforce the loan arising from priority deeds and overrun guarantees until written discharge by third‑party lenders…
18 Sept 2020

ALMARZOOQI v SALIH [2020] NZHC 2441

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2441
Court

High Court

Summary judgment dismissed because the plaintiff failed to establish that the UAE court had the necessary in personam jurisdiction under New Zealand private international law to make and therefore to enforce the ancillary monetary orders against the defendant; other objections (natural justice, fraud, public policy) were considered and not found to justify enforcement, but the jurisdictional defect was dispositive.
27 Nov 2018

MOUNT GREY DOWNS LIMITED v PINOT PROPERTIES LIMITED [2018] NZHC 3094

Citation

[2018] NZHC 3094
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was dismissed because defendants raised arguable defences: credible, uncontradicted evidence that the plaintiff gave a pre-contract estimate which may have been relied on and may give rise to actionable consequences, and arguable non-compliance by plaintiff with the contractual audit provision (failure to provide detailed time-sheets). Plaintiff failed to demonstrate there was no defence to its claim on the material before the Court.
1 Jun 2018

CROWN FINANCE LIMITED v CRONIN [2018] NZHC 1289

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1289
Court

High Court

Summary judgment could not be granted in full because there is an arguable defence that the receiver breached s 19 in selling to a related company and that Crown Finance Ltd may be liable for its involvement; however there is a minimum liquidated shortfall that can be established now and judgment is awarded for that reduced sum with further interlocutory steps and a full hearing ordered to resolve the related-party sale issues.
2 Mar 2018

NGATI TAMA CUSTODIAN TRUSTEE LTD v PHILLIPS [2018] NZHC 304

Citation

[2018] NZHC 304
Court

High Court

The deed settled issues that were still live at the date of settlement as informed by Venning J's judgment; ownership of the business systems IP had been sold to KGB in September 2010, that sale was known to the parties and had not been set aside, and Venning J had not determined ownership of those business systems IP, so those assets were not within the ambit of the deed and the notices did not breach the settlement; summary judgment was therefore dismissed and the interim injunction discharged.
30 Oct 2017

CORPORATE SURETIES LIMITED v MACKEN AND KEARNEY [2017] NZHC 2700

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2700
Court

High Court

The correspondence showed parties and their lawyers operated on the basis that a formal signed sale and purchase agreement and trustee resolution were prerequisites to contract formation; accordingly it was arguable (and accepted for summary judgment purposes) that the trustees did not intend to be bound until a written agreement was signed and the resolution passed, so summary judgment could not be granted.
11 Aug 2017

BIGYARD HOLDINGS LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP) & ANOR v TASMANDAIRY LIMITED & ANOR [2017] NZHC 1918

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1918
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was declined because material disputes of fact and credibility persisted about which assets were owned by Doxcon and subsequently transferred, the evidential foundation (valuation and asset lists) was contested, and further discovery and a trial were required; although Asset Finance held a perfected security and had a right to possession, equitable delivery up was inappropriate on the available material and the application had to be resisted.
13 Apr 2017

GENERAL FINANCE LIMITED v SEREPISOS [2017] NZHC 749

Citation

[2017] NZHC 749
Court

High Court

Defendant raised an arguable s176 defence based on unpursued purchaser interest and agent conduct sufficient to require trial; however plaintiff showed there was no arguable defence to a quantified shortfall such that summary judgment was appropriate in part — judgment entered for plaintiff for NZD 50,000 and remainder of claims to proceed to trial.
8 Sept 2016

ANZ BANK NEW ZEALAND LIMITED v NGUY [2016] NZHC 2129

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2129
Court

High Court

The Deed contained an express unambiguous acknowledgement of personal liability arising from the Guarantee and, absent fraud, illegality or valid grounds for rescission, estopped the defendant from denying liability; alleged misrepresentations were legal opinion, not actionable inducements, and claims under the CCCFA and for breach of s176 lacked arguable evidential basis—therefore no real defence existed and summary judgment was appropriate for the claimed sum.