New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Constructive notice

Legal area

Court

2 Jul 2010

ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED V KOHIMARAMARA TARAWERA LIMITED & ANOR HC AK CIV 2009-404-003290

Citation

openlaw-8707ce66_2295_41dc_9b28_351b2ac2ac60.pdf
Court

High Court

The defendant did not adduce sufficient credible evidence of undue influence or facts that would have put ANZ on inquiry; the transaction appeared commercial (sole director/shareholder guaranteeing company debt) and ANZ was entitled to rely on the solicitor's certificate; accordingly there was no arguable defence and summary judgment was entered for ANZ.
11 Jun 2010

JAMES KERRY LANGTON AND MURRAY BRYCE FREESTONE V DOUGLAS MARK ANDREW BURGESS HC AK CIV 2009-404-005470

Citation

openlaw-d23424f8_b69e_4092_b09f_d167a21bc0c9.pdf
Court

High Court

Because the only substantive issue remaining between the parties is quantum, and liability for breach of contract and negligence is established on the evidence and legal principle of constructive notice, the Court will enter summary judgment on liability for the plaintiffs and remit assessment of damages, costs and interest to a subsequent hearing under r 12.3.
2 Sept 2009

ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED V SMITH AND ANOR HC AK CIV-2008-404-007866

Citation

openlaw-0f02e920_8deb_406a_9ab1_a243e250e8c3.pdf
Court

High Court

On these facts the bank had no actual knowledge of undue influence, Mr Smith was not the bank's agent to procure Stowers' signature, the bank reasonably relied on the solicitor's certificate and was not put on constructive notice; therefore Stowers had no reasonably arguable defence and summary judgment was properly granted.
27 Aug 2009

ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED V CAVANAGH & ANOR HC AK CIV 2008-404-001515

Citation

openlaw-d45b3834_b428_4b0a_9347_facf486f3b36.pdf
Court

High Court

ANZ established a prima facie claim for the unpaid loan balance; the facts known to ANZ did not objectively put a reasonable banker on inquiry of undue influence or unconscionable conduct, ANZ was entitled to rely on its solicitor's certificate and lending procedures, and therefore the second defendant had no arguable defence — summary judgment was appropriate.
5 Feb 2007

RUTHERFORD V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND HC WN CIV-2006-485-1345

Citation

openlaw-df5b6255_660e_4063_9ff1_5fd291122e57.pdf
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was dismissed because the plaintiff raised an arguable presumption of undue influence that could be imputed to the bank; the bank was arguably put on inquiry given it handled related facilities and used separate solicitors, and therefore could not safely rely on the solicitor's certificate; factual disputes require trial.

New Zealand Case Law

ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED V KOHIMARAMARA TARAWERA LIMITED & ANOR HC AK CIV 2009-404-003290

JAMES KERRY LANGTON AND MURRAY BRYCE FREESTONE V DOUGLAS MARK ANDREW BURGESS HC AK CIV 2009-404-005470

ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED V SMITH AND ANOR HC AK CIV-2008-404-007866

ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED V CAVANAGH & ANOR HC AK CIV 2008-404-001515

RUTHERFORD V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND HC WN CIV-2006-485-1345