Summary judgment — transfer of legal land title — District Court Act 2016, s 79 — AGC (NZ) Ltd v McBeth [1992] 3 NZLR 54 — District Court Rules 2014, 15.8 — Māori Trustee v Hooper [2017] NZDC 10975, 15 December 2017. The plaintiff sought summary judgment to recover possession of land of which, he argued, he was now the unencumbered owner. The basis for this claim was that the defendant signed a deed that transferred the property from the defendant to the plaintiff. It was designed to avoid a mortgagee sale and stipulated that the plaintiff would forgive $131,000 of the debt owed to him, while the defendant would meet the remaining balance of the debt by $400 consecutive fortnightly payments. The deed also required the defendant to vacate the property 42 days after settlement. The defendant did not vacate the property after the 42 day period expired. Further, the defendant only made some payments after the 42 day period, but ceased doing so after 30 October 2017. The defendant did not challenge the summary judgment application by any formal steps but did allege she was "blackmailed" into handing over title. The allegation was made without evidence. The Judge held that the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment and ordered possession of the land to the plaintiff. The Judge found that the allegations of blackmail were without evidence and appeared to be contradicted by the deed, which stated the defendant should seek independent legal advice, which she declined to do. Further, the plaintiff's claim should not be frustrated by the defendant failing to get legal advice about the allegation. The Judge also noted the plaintiff would have also been successful through judgment by default. Costs were awarded in favour of the plaintiff on a 2B basis. Judgment Date: 19 January 2018.