New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Registration of mortgage

Legal area

Court

8 Aug 2017

THORN v UNITED STEEL LTD [2017] NZHC 1865

Citation

(2017) 18 NZCPR 711
Court

High Court

Although clause 19 gave United Steel a contractual right to take security and to lodge a caveat and potentially to register a mortgage, the registration by e-dealing was invalid because United Steel's authority to act as attorney for the mortgagor was not conferred by deed; an attorney purporting to execute or authorise registration of an instrument that has the effect of a deed must have been appointed by deed, and the certificate of non-revocation asserting appointment by deed was incorrect, so United Steel lacked lawful authority to register the mortgage; United Steel remained entitled to…
26 Jun 2015

THOMPSON v DD CONSTRUCTION LTD [2015] NZHC 1458

Citation

[2015] NZHC 1458
Court

High Court

The Court gave effect to the parties' consent terms: it ordered removal of the two mortgages and restrained further registrations, struck out the interim injunction and summary judgment applications with costs reserved, and made case management directions; the Court did not decide the substantive merits of the alleged unlawful registration.
10 Nov 2006

ARATORO HOLDINGS LIMITED V RHODES & CO AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV-2006-409-001427

Citation

openlaw-d404cc09_c708_4c63_a6aa_c932862eb45e.pdf
Court

High Court

The mortgage was tendered conditionally in direct response to the bankruptcy notice for the specific purpose of satisfying that notice; Damesh rejected that condition; by receiving and later registering the mortgage Rhodes & Co and Damesh breached the trust arising from the conditional tender; Rhodes & Co is liable as a primary party and Aratoro is entitled to summary judgment on liability, a declaration that Damesh has no beneficial or proprietary interest, and an order discharging the mortgage, with damages to be assessed at trial.
2 Aug 2006

WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION V A CLARK HC AK CIV2006-404-2175

Citation

openlaw-7ec65825_af87_4553_8e41_706c60004507.pdf
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was dismissed because, although the defendant breached his undertaking by failing to promptly register the mortgage, the plaintiff failed at the summary stage to prove causation of its loss; unresolved issues including the plaintiff's lending decisions and whether registration would have led to recovery require further disclosure and trial.

New Zealand Case Law

THORN v UNITED STEEL LTD [2017] NZHC 1865

THOMPSON v DD CONSTRUCTION LTD [2015] NZHC 1458

ARATORO HOLDINGS LIMITED V RHODES & CO AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV-2006-409-001427

WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION V A CLARK HC AK CIV2006-404-2175