New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Lease termination

Legal area

Court

8 Mar 2023

FITZGERALD v BARRETT [2023] NZHC 437

Citation

[2023] NZHC 437
Court

High Court

No lease term had been agreed so s210 PLA 2007 applied and the plaintiffs' 20 working day termination notice was valid; contemporaneous communications, taking possession and a partial payment of rent established an oral agreement to pay $2,990 per month and constituted part performance; allowing the defendants to rely on the PLA writing requirement would be unconscionable; summary judgment granted for vacant possession and unpaid rent of $35,880, with defendants ordered to vacate within three working days and leave reserved for further rent to the date of vacation.
3 Feb 2023

CHEN XI ENTERPRISES LTD v TRIPLE UNION LTD [2023] NZHC 94

Citation

[2023] NZHC 94
Court

High Court

The District Court erred in dismissing the landlord's claim for loss of rent: the evidence established on the balance of probabilities that the respondent interfered with the upstairs power and intended to induce the tenant to abandon the tenancy, causation and loss were proven (unpaid rent NZD 4,800), and mitigation arguments did not reduce recovery; appeal allowed in part and judgment entered for NZD 4,800 plus interest.
11 Oct 2022

SHK TRUSTEE COMPANY LTD v NZDMG LTD [2022] NZHC 2620

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2620
Court

High Court

Court held plaintiffs entitled to recover adjusted rent for COVID periods: 70% of rent/outgoings for Alert Level 3 and 60% for Alert Level 4 (specific sums awarded), interest at 12% from 1 August 2020 on those sums, full recovery of removal and premises reinstatement costs and legal costs; the s245 notices were not invalid despite overstating amounts; plaintiff's claim for loss of future rent after re-entry was rejected in part because plaintiff failed to mitigate; all defendants' counterclaims dismissed.
7 Jul 2020

VILLA STREET HOLDINGS LIMITED v WATER MART WAIRARAPA (2017) LIMITED [2020] NZHC 1569

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1569
Court

High Court

The contractual indemnity in the lease entitled the applicant to recover solicitor and client costs; having reviewed rates, time spent and the factual background (including respondent conduct and overlap with a separate commercial dispute), the Court concluded the fees charged ($27,280 plus $540 disbursements) were within a reasonable range and awarded the full amount claimed.
19 Sept 2019

RESTAURANT BRANDS LIMITED v FORSGREN NZ LIMITED [2019] NZHC 2375

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2375
Court

High Court

The phrase 'terminated or lapses for any reason' in cl 3(f) is given its ordinary and natural meaning, which includes termination by operation of law following the Crown's acquisition under the Public Works Act 1981; the sublease was functionally terminated and therefore RBL is entitled to payment of the $400,000 Escrow Amount under cl 3(f).
12 Jun 2019

WARD v LOCHORE [2019] NZHC 1314

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1314
Court

High Court

All causes of action against the defendant were untenable: the pleaded lease and statutory rights were held by other parties (Galbraith or Altranz) not the defendant personally, criminal allegations do not create civil causes of action, and 'general damage' is not a standalone cause of action; accordingly the statement of claim was properly struck out under r 15.1.
9 Aug 2018

JNJ HOLDINGS LIMITED v KENT SING TRADING COMPANY LIMITED & ORS [2018] NZHC 2022 [9 August 2018]

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2022
Court

High Court

Clause 14.1(b) was construed as sufficiently broad to include solicitor-client (indemnity) costs for proceedings arising out of breaches committed prior to termination; cancellation did not extinguish JNJ's right to indemnity for pre-termination breaches. However significant deficiencies in particularity, overlap, inclusion of non-recoverable items and unreasonable quantum justified a global reduction of 70% to the claimed sums, producing awarded amounts of $61,146.18 against Kent Sing and guarantors and $21,491.10 against General Goods on a 2B basis.
6 Jul 2018

OMV NEW ZEALAND LTD v PRECINCT PROPERTIES HOLDINGS LTD [2018] NZCA [240]

Citation

[2018] NZCA
Court

Court of Appeal

Clause 44.3 operates as an exception to the lease's arbitration clause (cl 44.1) and permits the landlord to bring court proceedings for unpaid rent; a tenant may plead a defence that rent is not payable, but set-offs and counterclaims arising from alleged breaches or misrepresentations are for arbitration; therefore the High Court rightly refused to stay the landlord's summary judgment proceedings and the appeal is dismissed.
28 Nov 2017

PRECINCT PROPERTIES HOLDINGS LIMITED v OMV NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2017] NZHC 2926

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2926
Court

High Court

Clause 44.3 of the lease expressly preserved the landlord's right to commence court proceedings to recover rent and other monies payable under the lease notwithstanding the existence of an arbitration clause; accordingly the stay application was dismissed and the landlord may pursue recovery in court even though the tenant contends the lease was validly terminated or that other disputes arise that could be arbitrated.
6 Jun 2017

Charming Group (NZ) Limited v Singh [2017] NZHC 1217

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1217
Court

High Court

Although Charming was found to be the factual owner of the disputed chattels, the High Court upheld the District Court's finding that Yeoh and Li had been held out as owners and the landlords acted on that assumption causing detriment; accordingly Charming is estopped from asserting ownership and the sale was effective; alternatively Charming's claims failed for want of contractual relationship, possession and evidential support.