17 Sept 2014
UDC v BRUNTON [2014] NZHC 2247
- Citation
- [2014] NZHC 2247
- Court
- High Court
Summary judgment was refused. The alleged equitable estoppel based on the 15 September 2004 letter was not an arguable defence to defeat UDC's claim because once Stroke's debt ceased to exist and RMD became directly indebted by fresh borrowings the Clancy letter did not prevent UDC pursuing guarantors for RMD's new borrowings; additionally there was no evidential basis for estoppel by silence. However the defendants raised an arguable defence that UDC breached its duty to obtain the best price reasonably obtainable when selling secured machinery (insufficient evidence as to whether TradeMe ad…