New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Minority oppression (s174)

Legal area

Court

9 Nov 2021

HISCOCK v PANMURE ORCHARDS LIMITED [2021] NZHC 3020

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3020
Court

High Court

Summary judgment for defendants was refused because the plaintiff's compensation claim for unpaid skilled labour and entitlement to remuneration raises disputed primary facts and legal issues—including scope of work, reasonable expectations of remuneration and effect of delay—which are unsuitable for resolution by an independent valuer and require a trial; although other allegations (excessive remuneration, in-kind benefits, current account debits) could be addressed by valuation, the existence of the uncompromised remuneration claim was decisive.
25 May 2012

BLACK V GILTECH PRECISION CASTINGS (2004) LIMITED HC DUN CIV-2010-412-000105

Citation

openlaw-3b51dca2_585b_4c87_ac2c_306c621d210f.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court found on the balance of probabilities that the plaintiff had agreed to the five‑year requirement and the terms recorded in Schedule 6; the drafts recorded that agreement; the defendants acted in accordance with that binding agreement (and estoppel); their conduct was not oppressive under s174; all causes of action failed and judgment was entered for the defendants.