9 Feb 2023
Defendants filed no defence and the undisputed terms of the settlement and varied deed revoked their licence and required vacation and rental payments; under r12.2 the Court was satisfied there was no real question to be tried and made orders for immediate possession, specific performance, payment of unpaid rent with interest and costs.
20 Dec 2021
Because liability had already been determined, the court confined itself to quantifying arrears and accepted the applicant's calculations and evidence, awarding judgment for $106,184.82 as at 12 October 2021, with contractual interest at 14% per annum and costs reserved; the court also permitted Ms Armitage to represent Hum for the limited purpose of quantum.
26 Jun 2018
The application to set aside the statutory demand was dismissed because Specialist Helicopter Solutions failed to establish any bona fide or substantial dispute or offsetting debt with adequate evidence (the alleged sub-lease was unsupported and related to a different entity; insurance payments were not proven to be payable by respondent); accordingly Rotor Lease's claim for rent stands.
18 Jul 2016
The defendants' documentary disclosure was incomplete and provenance of some invoices was doubtful, but because defendants swore there were no further documents and explained loss of some records, the court declined to order the broad particular discovery sought for invoices and shelving (paragraph 1A(a)); however the court ordered production of financial statements for year ended March 31 2014, GST returns for 2014 and the income tax return for year ended 2014, and awarded costs to the plaintiff on a 2B basis.
24 Jun 2016
On the affidavit evidence the defendant had no reasonably arguable defence to the plaintiffs' claim for rent, GST and interest: the defendant's denial about receipt/use of the disputed email was contradicted by contemporaneous email exchanges and the alleged contract variation or waiver was too vague, uncertified and unsupported by consideration; equitable set-off was not established; accordingly summary judgment for the plaintiffs for the agreed quantum is appropriate.
12 Oct 2011
Because the costs issue relating to rental arrears was not specifically appealed and was not fully ventilated on the appeal, and respondents objected to interference, the High Court set aside the District Court judgment on rental arrears and referred the specific costs issue back to the District Court to determine whether the costs award should be amended; costs in the High Court were awarded to the appellant.
15 May 2006
Plaintiff is entitled to an award of costs reduced to reflect partial success (one-third deduction), resulting in $16,820 plus disbursements, but enforcement is stayed pending a further hearing to determine quantum of the plaintiff's damages and any amount owing on the defendants' counterclaim because the evidence on arrears was unclear and the trial was confined to liability.