9 Aug 2017
PURE CRYSTAL HOLDINGS LTD v CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL [2017] NZHC 1885
- Citation
- [2017] NZHC 1885
- Court
- High Court
The caveat met s137 requirements because clause 40.2 in the lease created an arguable equitable interest (temporary easement/right of access) over the balance of the title; PCH demonstrated an arguable case that ECan was not entitled to cancel the lease because ECan may have failed to take reasonable steps to fulfil the condition in clause 40.1 and may have improperly relied on costs of a wider subdivision rather than the road itself; accordingly the caveat will not lapse pending trial.