New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leases

Legal area

Court

3 Dec 2020

S A MORRISON and THE AUDAINE TRUST TRUSTEES LTD v AUTUMNAL INVESTMENTS LTD [2020] NZHC 3189

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3189
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the Court found that Morrison and O'Reilly discussed and agreed a 'no cost trustee' arrangement in early April 2013 and at the 12 April 2013 meeting; Morrison was induced by O'Reilly's oral undertaking to transfer the properties and would not have done so otherwise; denial of the common intention would be fraudulent in equity; accordingly Autumnal holds the properties as trustee of an institutional constructive trust for the Audaine Trust and equitable relief (declaration and vesting subject to payment of mortgage, agreed trustee remuneration and reimbursement)…
5 Jun 2020

MT WELLINGTON RACE PARK CLUB INC v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2020] NZHC 1245

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1245
Court

High Court

The property is not a 'park' under s138 because it was acquired and held principally for roading purposes and interim recreational use by a private lessee did not convert its principal purpose into parkland; accordingly s138 did not require consultation and the application for judicial review is dismissed; additionally, even if an error had been made relief would be refused because of substantial prejudice to ITC as an innocent third party.
4 Oct 2016

ECO AUTO RECYCLERS LTD v KAIKORAI PROPERTY INVESTMENTS LTD [2016] NZHC 2362

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2362
Court

High Court

On the untested evidence the plaintiff established a reasonably arguable case of an enforceable oral agreement to lease by part performance; the balance of convenience favoured granting an interim injunction to preserve the plaintiff's possession and property pending further steps, subject to security by payment of rent into Court.
26 Feb 2015

BODY CORPORATE 401803 v VERMILLION WAGENER LTD [2014] NZHC 285

Citation

BODY CORPORATE 401803 v VERMILLION WAGENER LTD [2014] NZHC 285
Court

High Court

The Court held that the Apartment Lease and Amenities Lease guarantees were ultra vires and void because no duty in the Act or amended rules authorized the body corporate to enter long-term third‑party lease/guarantee arrangements and cl (b) of the Amenities guarantee conferred lessee‑like treatment inconsistent with s37(5). Clause 3.4 of the Management Agreement (except reimbursement of mobile phone costs) repeated and reinforced those ultra vires guarantees and is therefore void. The Court declined to grant relief under s140 UTA 2010 and declined summary disposal of the s140 claim due to pr…
14 Mar 2013

CHILD V BLACKLEY HC WHA CIV-2013-488-140

Citation

openlaw-2d98bc3c_96b3_46f2_bedc_51c5732c5e58.pdf
Court

High Court

The court refused the mandatory interim injunction because the applicants delayed from December 2012 until March 2013, and damages were likely to be an adequate remedy; instead the court made interlocutory preservation orders requiring the defendants to hold and manage surviving animals in accordance with good stock management and set procedures for sale proceeds and interim protection of sheep and a timetable for further proceedings.
1 Jul 2011

OTEHEI BAY HOLDINGS LIMITED (CA57/2010; CA684/2010) V FULLERS BAY OF ISLANDS LIMITED COA CA57/2010

Citation

openlaw-14d9bbf1_0ee7_440b_ad5a_812d86894ba4.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

Majority held that when the Crown acquired Urupukapuka Island in 1970 the leasehold estate fell within the scope of the reserves legislation; renewals at expiry of five-year terms constituted new grants; s21(2) migrated existing leases into the 1996 concessions regime so leases renewed after 1 July 1996 required a concession under Part 3B of the Conservation Act; therefore allowing the leasehold activity post-1996 without a concession was unlawful and the appeals fail (subject to variation of a publicity/injunction order).
22 Dec 2009

GULF HARBOUR INVESTMENTS AND ANOR V RODNEY DISTRICT COUNCIL HC AK CIV 2006-404-005005

Citation

openlaw-750ce06d_8203_4596_9dcb_651f88c2821f.pdf
Court

High Court

GH Investments' development rights were constrained by the existing licence and statutory planning and local government obligations; the Council was not estopped from asserting those constraints though it conceded a limited duty to subdivide and lease; consequently the Council is entitled to costs but at category 2B with a one quarter reduction to reflect GH Investments' partial success, and the Registrar is to assess and certify the costs and disbursements including second counsel.
27 Apr 2007

MARINOVIC V MARINOVIC HC AK CIV-2006-404-2447

Citation

openlaw-42ba143a_d272_45ad_b101_1b06556fc9f2.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court accepted the Tabakovics and plaintiffs' accounts, found that the agreement was read and explained to all parties, that the parties intended to be immediately bound, that defendants failed to prove non est factum or incapacity, and that the agreement was sufficiently certain; accordingly specific performance was ordered requiring simultaneous transfer of shares and property interests as set out in the agreement.