13 Dec 2022
The lease expired without a valid exercise of renewal because Lefkada was in breach and gave no written notice as required and did not bring timely s261 relief; Lefkada therefore had no reasonably arguable defence to BHP's claim and BHP was entitled to immediate possession from 19 May 2022; payment of rent after expiry did not estop BHP from seeking possession and likely negates recoverable damages.
21 Aug 2018
The Court held that many of the particular discovery orders were unjustified on the pleadings and for proportionality reasons: only works pleaded (the 'base build' on leasehold land) were in issue and bare denials did not expand the defendant's case to require broader discovery; accordingly orders for items 8, 9(i), 9(ii), 11, 14 and 15 were set aside while discovery of the photograph booklet (item 5) was upheld; targeted discovery may be permitted if the respondent amends pleadings to put additional matters in issue.
23 Oct 2012
The 9 May 2006 correspondence did not constitute an exercise of the renewal nor a binding agreement because it expressly contemplated preparation and execution of a formal variation, and independently the Ministry did not by words or conduct confer apparent authority on Mr Benjamin to conclude the renewal, so the tenant was not bound.
1 Jul 2011
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).
29 Oct 2007
The initial fixed term expired and thereby terminated the lease; holding over created a new monthly tenancy and did not preserve the original lease for purposes of the option date; because the option required exercise before termination Fresh Cut could not validly exercise it while holding over and equitable estoppel or part performance could at best create a new lease but could not revive or extend the strict option rights, so the claim fails.
17 May 2006
Clause 54 of the lease confers an unfettered discretion on the lessor to decide whether to grant a renewal; therefore there is no contractual obligation to grant a renewal and s 120 does not apply, so the Court has no jurisdiction to grant relief; alternatively, even if jurisdiction existed, relief would be refused because the lessee's chronic and significant payment defaults made refusal reasonable.
1 Jul 2004
There was no valid renewal; clause 38 produced a holding-over monthly tenancy on the original rent thus preserving the guarantor's liability; the appellant failed to establish an arguable set-off or defence and could not rely on the principal debtor's claims without joinder, so summary judgment was properly entered and the appeal is dismissed.