Cancellation
Body Corporate 202254 v Taylor
"In trade" within the meaning of s 9 FTA encompasses an agent who undertakes business on account of some other party.
Newport v Coburn
A "mere conduit" is not liable under s 9 FTA.
Taco Co of Australia Inc v Taco Bell Pty Ltd
A misrepresentation under the CRA is misleading within the meaning of s 9 FTA.
Unilever NZ Ltd v Cerebos Gregg's
A misrepresentation under the CRA is misleading within the meaning of s 9 FTA.
Hughes v Huppert
Affirmation according to s 7(5) CRA does not remove the right to damages for misrepresentation under s 6 CRA.
Tinnock v Birkenhead Heights Ltd
Breach of a dispute resolution clause in a building contract is "substantial" within the meaning of s 7(4)(b) CRA.
Nicholls v Tamariki Ltd (in liq)
Cancelling party who only seeks damages may not need to show that it was ready, willing and able to perform the contract.
Red Eagle Corp Ltd v Ellis
Construction of "misleading"/"deceptive" in s 9 FTA: determined by an objective assessment; the conduct of the defendant must be capable of being misleading/deceptive; requirement of causation.
Taylor Bros Ltd v Taylor Group Ltd
Construction of "misleading"/"deceptive" in s 9 FTA: one has to apply the ordinary words to the particular facts.
Mills v United Building Society
Construction of "misleading"/"deceptive" in s 9 FTA: that someone has been misled/deceived is not conclusive.
Progeni Systems Ltd v Hampton Studies Ltd
Defines "essential" within the meaning of s 7(4)(a) CRA.
Jolly v Palmer
Defines "substantial" within the meaning of s 7(4)(b) CRA; cancellation after having affirmed the contract (e.g. by resale) amounts to a repudiation of the contract.
Yu v T & P Developments Ltd
Defines when a term in the contract is broken before and at completion.
Betham v Margetts
Describes anticipatory repudiation within s 7(2) CRA.
Newmans Tours Ltd v Ranier Investments Ltd.
Describes s 9 CRA jurisdiction.
Hay v Chalmers
Example of "in trade" within the meaning of s 9 FTA.
New Zealand Tenancy Bonds Ltd v Mooney
Example of an essential term within the meaning of s 7(4)(a) CRA.
Hochster v De la Tour
Example of an explicit anticipatory repudiation within s 7(2) CRA ("by words").
Gallagher v Young
Example of s 7(4)(b) CRA.
Hansen v Boocock
Example of s 7(4)(b)(i) CRA.
Car and Universal Finance Co Ltd v Caldwell
Example of s 8(1)(b) CRA.
Jackson v McClintock
Example of s 9(4) CRA.
Harvey Corp Ltd v Barker
Expectation damages and damages for a lost benefit cannot be claimed under the FTA.
Cox & Coxon Ltd v Leipst
Expectation damages cannot be claimed under the FTA.
Sharplin v Henderson
If a contracting-out clause does not cover a particular breach, the remedies under the CRA will apply.
Garratt v Ikeda
If accrued unconditionally before cancellation, purchaser has to pay the deposit even after cancellation took effect.
Brown v Langwoods Photo Stores Ltd
If accrued unconditionally before cancellation, purchaser has to pay the deposit even after cancellation took effect; courts have wide discretion to grant relief under s 9 CRA.
Broadlands Finance v Inwood
Instead of cancellation under the CRA, a right of rejection applies to the sale of goods, ss 32, 36 f SGA.
Starlight Enterprises Ltd v Lapco Enterprises Ltd.
No repudiation, no right to cancel under s 7(2) CRA; whether party intend to perform or not is assessed from the point of view of a reasonable person.
Forde v Electrodry NZ
Not required that relief under s 9 CRA be pleaded ("the court, in any proceedings ..., may ... if it is just and practicable to do so, make an order").
Nectar Ltd v SPHC Operations (NZ) Ltd
Parties are presumed to know the terms of their own contract.
Brooklands Motor Co Ltd (in rec) v Bridge Wholesale Acceptance Corp (Australia) Ltd
Reasonable bystander test for s 7(3)(c) CRA.
Savill v NZI Finance Ltd
S 9 FTA also applies to situations not covered by the CRA.
Lovelock v Franklyn
Sale to a third person is an example of an implicit anticipatory repudiation within s 7(2) CRA ("by conduct").
Broadcasting Corp of NZ v Nielsen
Secondary obligations survive cancellation by virtue of s 5 CRA.
Henjo Investments Pty Ltd v Collins Marrickville Pty Ltd (No 1)
Silence falls under s 2(2) FTA ("engaging in conduct").
Moodie v Agriultural Ventures Ltd
Ss 7-9 CRA do not apply to the sale of goods.
Finch Motors Ltd v Quin (No 2)
The CRA does not apply to contracts for the sale of goods, ss 60(2) SGA, 15(d) CRA.
Jack v Guy
The obligation to obtain resource consent is an essential term for the purposes of anticipatory repudiation within s 7(2) CRA.
Young v Hunt
The plaintiff has to prove that "the performance of the term is essential to him", s 7(4)(a) CRA.
Mana Property Trustee Ltd v James Developments Ltd
The time by which a contract must be performed matters for s 7(2) CRA; a breach of an essential term with only a minor effect entitles cancellation under s 7(4)(a) CRA and so, under s 7(4)(b), does a breach of any term, even a minor term, if it has a serious effect.
White and Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor
To cancel is only an option: the entitled party can complete performance and demand the consideration.
Cullinane v McGuigan
To determine "substantially", the courts take subjective and objective factors (money) into account.
Pearson v Wynn
To determine "substantially", the courts take subjective and objective factors (money) into account.
Burch v Willoughby Consultants Ltd
Under 9(2)(b) CRA, damages for loss of income, mental suffering and distress can be awarded.
Ingram v Patcroft Properties Ltd
What if cancelling party is unwilling or unable to perform the contract; party must not benefit from its own wrong.
Noble Investments v Keenan
What if cancelling party is unwilling or unable to perform the contract; party must not benefit from its own wrong.
Thompson v Vincent
What if cancelling party unaware of justifiable grounds; s 9 CRA empowers a court to grant relief to both parties (not only to the cancelling party).
Donnelly v Westpac Banking Corp
What if one party cancels on unjustifiable grounds.
Denarau Investments Ltd v Ludlow
Whether party intend to perform or not within s 7(2) CRA is assessed from the point of view of a reasonable person.
Oxborough v North Harbour Builders Ltd
Whether party intend to perform or not within s 7(2) CRA is assessed from the point of view of a reasonable person; defines when a stipulation is broken before and at completion; the continuation of the repudiation gives the innocent party a continuing right to cancel; a further breach after affirmation revives the right to cancel.