30 Jan 2009
GXL ROYALTIES LIMITED V SWIFT ENERGY NEW ZEALAND LIMITED AND ANOR HC WN CIV-2008-485-1776
- Citation
- openlaw-480663df_9e6a_4dd8_a17e_fc20dcb06616.pdf
- Court
- High Court
Allegations that a consenting party refused consent for collateral purposes may be relevant to a determination of whether consent was unreasonably withheld under the royalty deed; GXL must provide substantive, non-evasive responses to the particulars in paragraph 30(e) and the cross-referenced paragraph 54. The court declined to adopt a universal two-stage subjective/objective rule for all commercial consent clauses but held motive can be relevant in some circumstances and therefore cannot be struck out at this stage.