5 Mar 2019
CROWN PARK COMMERCIAL LTD v LIMELIGHT 2012 LTD & WALL [2019] NZHC 350
- Citation
- [2019] NZHC 350
- Court
- High Court
Substituted service was appropriate because Limelight's solicitor and the second defendant's conveyancer could be relied on to bring the papers to the defendant's attention; and the plaintiff proved on concrete evidence sufficient for leave under r 17.41 — the tenant vacated, fixtures removed, the guarantor left New Zealand without providing an address and her property was conditionally on the market — which, together with a reasonably arguable claim under the guarantee and a no‑set‑off clause, established intent to defeat creditors and warranted leave to issue an interim charging order prior…