Pepper New Zealand Limited v Chandler [2012] NZHC 1348 (14 June 2012)

High Court of New Zealand

[Index] [Search] [Download] [Help]

---

Pepper New Zealand Limited v Chandler [2012] NZHC 1348 (14 June 2012)

Last Updated: 22 June 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2012-404-2264 [2012] NZHC 1348

BETWEEN PEPPER NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Plaintiff

AND BRUCE M CHANDLER Defendant

Hearing: 14 June 2012

Appearances: Mr Pamatatau for Plaintiff

Mr Chandler in person

Judgment: 14 June 2012

_{ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE DOOGUE}

Counsel:

Gibson Sheat, Private Bag 31-905, Lower Hutt – [e-mail]

(Counsel: Mr Pamatatau, Auckland – [e-mail]) Mr B Chandler, 56 Duffy Road, Waitakere.

PEPPER NEW ZEALAND LIMITED V CHANDLER HC AK CIV-2012-404-2264 [14 June 2012]

[1] There was an error in the statement of claim. After hearing from Mr Chandler and Mr Pamatatau I have granted leave for the plaintiff to amend the statement of claim at paragraph 11 so that the date that it leaves is 22 June 2011.

[2] Mr Chandler addressed me on his wish to stay in the property. At this point a mortgagee sale has not been initiated. I have attempted to explain to him that obtaining the order for vacant possession is a prelude to a mortgagee sale. Mr Chandler does not have any viable opposition to the application for vacant possession given that the point he raised in his notice of opposition about the wrong date has not disappeared as ground of opposition. It probably never was a substantial basis to oppose the application for vacant possession. Mr Pamatatau has agreed on behalf of the plaintiff that any order for vacant possession should be on terms that Mr Chandler can remain in the property until 28 days after the sealed judgment granting vacant possession is served upon Mr Chandler. That does not seem to me to be an unreasonable position for the plaintiff to take. On that basis I approve the form of the order that is sought in the statement of claim with the change of the period when vacant possession is to be given from 14 days as stated in the statement of claim to 28 days. I make an order for costs on a 1A basis and I also approve the disbursements sought in paragraph 4(c) of counsel for the plaintiff’s

_{memorandum of 14 June 2012.}

J.P. Doogue

Associate Judge