9 May 2016
POLLARD v POLLARD [2016] NZCA 186
- Citation
- (2016) 23 PRNZ 229
- Court
- Court of Appeal
The Court declined to admit further evidence and dismissed the appeal: the appellants failed to establish a reasonably arguable promissory estoppel to support a deduction for the additional subdivided land (evidence was inconsistent, improbable and lacked requisite unequivocality and reasonable reliance), and the High Court did not err in refusing to exercise residual discretion to withhold summary judgment; summary judgment for $373,825 (plus interest) stands.