In Firm PI 1 Limited v Zurich Australasian Insurance Limited t/a Zurich New Zealand & Anor[2014]NZSC 147, a majority of the Supreme Court has affirmed the importance of an objective approach to interpretation, and of the need for caution before departing from the natural meaning of contractual language on grounds of “commercial absurdity”. ..
In Body Corporate 346930 & Anor v Argon Construction Limited & Anor [2015] NZHC 129 (Asher J) (the “Scholar decision”) released by the High Court on 10 February 2015 Katz J struck out a claim by Auckland City Council against the Building Industry Authority (“BIA”). Council alleged that BIA owed Council and Scholar (the building owners) a duty of care to investigate queries concerning the activities of private building certifiers (“a duty to investigate”) which it breached by failing to investigate a certifier, Compass. Secondly, Council alleged that the BIA owed Council and the owners a duty to notify them in a timely manner when the scope of authority of Compass was modified (“a duty to notify”). ..
In an important case for body corporates and body corporate managers (Wu v Body Corporate 366611 & Theta Management Ltd [2014] NZSC 137), the Supreme Court has upheld a unit owner’s claim in trespass after he was effectively locked out of his apartment by the Body Corporate for refusing to sign up to an informal “Security Protocol” and pay a “security deposit”. The Court reversed a Court of Appeal ruling that the Body Corporate had power under its Rules to restrict access for certain owners and occupiers. ..
In Wilson Parking New Zealand Limited v Fanshawe 136 Limited [2014] NZCA 407 the Court of Appeal confirmed detrimental reliance as the basis for the enforcement of a (non-contractual) promise. Further, the Court confirmed that relief in this context could extend beyond monetary damages for losses suffered by the promisee, to enforcement of the promise itself. ..