21 Mar 2012
The District Court judge did not commit an appealable error in refusing to extend the stay; given the imminent expiry of the tenancy under s51(1) notice and absence of demonstrated error in the exercise of discretion, the High Court dismissed the appeal.
7 Nov 2011
The High Court held the District Court judge exceeded jurisdiction by granting and extending a stay and directing the tenancy to continue without the receipt or written evidence required by s117(11) RTA; the Tenancy Tribunal had not erred in terminating the tenancy for rent arrears and the stay must be quashed so the Tribunal's orders remain in force.
28 Oct 2010
Summary judgment as to liability was appropriate but the plaintiff failed to provide a verified schedule to establish the full claimed quantum; judgment was therefore limited to the undisputed amount of $640,000 plus interest from 16 July 2010. An order for possession was granted to TEA because s139(1)(c) Property Law Act 2007 treats a court order as constituting mortgagee in possession from the date of application, meaning TEA's possession takes priority over the second mortgagee and the alleged tenancy need not prevent the Court granting possession.
5 May 2010
The District Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the challenge to the s51 90 day notice because such challenges fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal under s82(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986; the s51 notice and s55 proceedings are separate streams and one does not nullify the other; therefore the appeal is dismissed and the interim stay is lapsed.
15 Apr 2008
The interim stay was refused because the respondent's undertaking not to pass title until the Court determined the application for special leave sufficiently protected the appellant from prejudice, making a stay unnecessary.
18 Oct 2007
The stay was refused because the appellant had no realistic prospect of success — he could only claim to be a sub-tenant whose occupancy ended with termination of the head tenancy, his arrangement with the tenant was not binding on the landlord, and significant unpaid rent arrears weighed heavily against a stay.