New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Easement interference

Legal area

Court

20 May 2022

FUGE & ORS v WIMAX NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2022] NZHC 1121

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1121
Court

High Court

The High Court held the arbitrator erred in law by construing the 2017 easement and implied statutory terms as limited to protecting only the formed driveway; the correct interpretation protects the entire easement facility and encroachments into that area can be actionable if they substantially interfere with the easement; because the arbitrator also misapplied the substantial interference test by confining it to effects on the formed driveway, the appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted to the arbitrator to determine appropriate remedy.
7 Dec 2009

MIKITASOV V COLLINS (NO 4) HC WHA CIV-2008-488-000053

Citation

openlaw-09a3c7b7_3319_4f2f_afaa_6524dabdfa9f.pdf
Court

High Court

Defendant breached clause 6.2(5) by undertaking numerous building works and repairs without required building consents (weathertight repairs, pool, deck, screen wall, basement unit), and made a pre-contractual misrepresentation about the house's condition; plaintiff was entitled to special damages for remediation costs ($329,536.47), diminution in value attributable to leaky building issues ($150,000), general damages for distress ($25,000), interest at 8.4% on special damages from judgment, and costs on a 2B basis.