New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Wrongful re-entry

Legal area

Court

29 Oct 2021

PARKHURST v BISHT [2021] NZHC 2888

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2888
Court

High Court

The appeal was allowed because the District Court erred in awarding damages for loss of a chance: the alleged lost opportunities were too speculative, inadequately pleaded and inadequately supported by evidence (no reliable valuation or offers, contested renovation proofs, uncertain corporate payments and contingencies including lawful forfeiture risk). The only reliable sum was the value of wrongfully retained chattels; the original $66,360.93 award was quashed and substituted with $11,360.93.
14 Sept 2011

SIMPLY LOGISTICS LIMITED V REAL FOODS LIMITED HC AK CIV-2011-404-3497

Citation

openlaw-d12e0db4_36b5_4d9a_8324_dd94d97ca203.pdf
Court

High Court

Although contractual no-set-off clauses ordinarily weigh against setting aside a statutory demand, the court will exercise its s 290 discretion where particular circumstances make refusal to set aside oppressive or unfair. Here Real Foods' refusal to apply admitted, undisputed invoices against the rent and its deliberate retention of Simply Logistics' pallets produced a net position where undisputed sums plus the pallet claim exceeded the statutory demand; accordingly the statutory demand was set aside.
24 Aug 2007

INGRAM AND ORS V PATCROFT PROPERTIES LIMITED AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2006-404-4171

Citation

openlaw-f9077a79_3280_4a7c_b6e5_02a00a8dce1e.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court found there was a prima facie basis that specific categories and identifiable documents were or should have been within the defendants' possession or control and ordered further and better discovery of those specified items, declined to make immediate orders concerning unspecified materials left in the premises or the disposed computer but required enquiries and reserved powers to examine individuals on oath if necessary; costs were awarded to the plaintiffs on a 2B basis and case management directions including a trial allocation were given.

New Zealand Case Law

PARKHURST v BISHT [2021] NZHC 2888

SIMPLY LOGISTICS LIMITED V REAL FOODS LIMITED HC AK CIV-2011-404-3497

INGRAM AND ORS V PATCROFT PROPERTIES LIMITED AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2006-404-4171