Published 17 November 2016
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.
This website explains many of the things you might want to know if you are coming to the Youth Court, or just wondering how the Youth Court works.
Visit website›Ministry of Justice website with information on family issues including about going to court, forms and other times when you may need help.
Visit website›For information about courts and tribunals, including going to court, finding a court & collection of fines and reparation.
Visit website›On this site you will find information about our Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and High Court including recent decisions, daily lists and news.
Visit website›