Summary judgment — District Courts Rules 2014, r 12.2 — Law Reform Act 1936 — duress. The plaintiff met the requirements of r 12.2, satisfying the Court that the defendant had no defence to the claim. Neither ignorance of a provision of the Law Reform Act 1936 nor alleged duress could be relied upon by the defendant to defeat the claim. In this application for summary judgment, for a settlement amount relating to a proceeding before the High Court for a weathertight home type case, the defendant had claimed that his lawyer did not have authority to to negotitate and settle the original claim and that he had agreed to the settlement but only through duress. It was further claimed that the agreement was unlawful because the Council had not mentioned s 17 (c) of the Law Reform Act, under which the Council was entitled to recover a contribution from the defendant, in a letter sent informing him of the claim and he should not be liable to pay. Accordingly, summary judgment was entered for the sum of $50,000 with interest and costs. Judgment Date: 31 May 2016.