28 Aug 2015
NEW ZEALAND MINT LIMITED v GREYS AVENUE INVESTMENT LIMITED [2015] NZHC 2051
- Citation
- [2015] NZHC 2051
- Court
- High Court
Clause 20.1 did not apply to the reception alterations because the lease's definition of 'premises' and the lease language treated the landlord's fixtures and fittings as distinct from the demised premises; accordingly there was no entitlement to cancel the lease on that basis. Alternatively, even if clause 20.1 were engaged, termination would be a disproportionate response to the minor, remediable works and relief under s253 is granted. The respondent's conduct in issuing the Property Law Act notice was unreasonable and costs are awarded to the applicant on a 2B basis without uplift.