5 Mar 2019
HAINES v HERD [2019] NZHC 342
- Citation
- [2019] NZHC 342
- Court
- High Court
The Court held the VBSA was admissible in New Zealand, the parties had agreed all essential terms (land by value with Herd to nominate), s40 writing requirement satisfied, Herd was in default and Haines properly issued notice and repossessed the vessel, Clause 9 provided primary remedy sequence but was not exclusive of common law damages, Haines was not required to sell mortgage land before claiming shortfall, plaintiffs acted reasonably to mitigate, and both Herd and guarantor Rhumba are liable for the shortfall, contractual interest and certain specified costs.