Print this page

Mana PropertyTrustee Ltd v James Development Ltd - SC 105/2009

Media releases

Summary

Civil – Interpreting terms of a sale and purchase agreement  – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by equating non-performance at the time of settlement with an automatic right to cancel – Whether the Court of Appeal were wrong to find that clause 18.3 of the agreement for sale and purchase was essential.[2009] NZCA 483    CA  241/2000  19 October  2009

Result

Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 March 2010
______________________
Appeal allowed. It is declared that the respondent’ s purported cancellation on 3 November 2008 of its contract with the appellant was of no effect.  The proceeding is remitted to the High Court for outstanding issues to be determined in light of this judgment.  The costs order made in the Court of Appeal is set aside. Costs are reserved.  Counsel should file memoranda. 
23 July 2010

Related Documents

Leave judgment - leave granted — MANA PROPERTY TRUSTEE LTD v JAMES DEVELOPMENTS LTD SC 105/2009 [1 March 2010]

Substantive judgment — MANA PROPERTY TRUSTEE LIMITED v JAMES DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED SC 105/2009 [23 July 2010] (PDF 200 KB)

Additional Information

Transcript Hearing date : 15 June 2010

Substantive judgment /Media release MANA PROPERTY TRUSTEE LIMITED v JAMES DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED SC 105/2009 [23 July 2010]

Judgment appealed from

JAMES DEVELOPMENTS LTD V MANA PROPERTY TRUSTEE LTD CA CA 241/2009 19 October 2009