New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Occupancy rights

Legal area

Court

11 Sept 2018

CARTWRIGHT & ANOR v JOSEPH & ORS [2018] NZHC 2383

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2383
Court

High Court

Deceased breached his moral duty to both daughters; to remedy the breach each daughter is entitled to an award equal to 10% of the estate. Final orders as to mechanism to realise that entitlement (provisional preference for subdividing S11/1 and selling the residue of 609 combined with 610) are deferred for further submissions to enable practical implementation without unduly displacing the surviving partner or overburdening executors.
1 Dec 2014

AHURIRI and ORS v ETHEREDGE [2014] NZHC 3031

Citation

[2014] NZHC 3031
Court

High Court

The Buckton plan realignment is just and equitable under ss 339-343; the proposed building sites must be allocated to K3A because joint owners have reasonable and evidenced expectations to enable potential dwelling sites; the unconsented Tahitahi house is excluded from valuation and the respondent cannot belatedly change valuation stance after close of evidence; the occupancy right gave no compensable loss once merged into legal title; K3B exceeds K3A by $21,000 so respondent must pay equalisation compensation of $10,500; partition costs to be shared equally.
12 May 2011

TAINUI DEVELOPMENT LIMITED V RANGIMARIE TE HORANGANUI MARAE TRUST HC HAM CIV 2010-419-001694

Citation

openlaw-4530c823_356e_4540_a9df_ccc6ef385f42.pdf
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was granted: the defendants had no legal proprietary interest, no enforceable lease or easement, and no clear and unequivocal representations or unconscionable conduct was shown to establish estoppel; accordingly the plaintiff was entitled to vacant possession and the joinder application was declined.

New Zealand Case Law

CARTWRIGHT & ANOR v JOSEPH & ORS [2018] NZHC 2383

AHURIRI and ORS v ETHEREDGE [2014] NZHC 3031

TAINUI DEVELOPMENT LIMITED V RANGIMARIE TE HORANGANUI MARAE TRUST HC HAM CIV 2010-419-001694