Browns Real Estate has failed in the Appeal Court to set aside a statutory demand of $134,931 from Grand Lakes Properties.The demand is for money owing on the lease of retail units in Queenstown.In a previous High Court action, Browns sought to set aside
Browns Real Estate has failed in the Appeal Court to set aside a statutory demand of $134,931 from Grand Lakes Properties.
The demand is for money owing on the lease of retail units in Queenstown.
In a previous High Court action, Browns sought to set aside the statutory demand on the basis that it had a counterclaim which exceeded the sum demanded.
The counterclaim arose from alleged misrepresentations about the quality and characteristics of the retail precinct made by Grand Lakes’ predecessor.
Associate High Court judge Rob Osborne had accepted that Browns had an arguable case that Grand Lakes’ predecessor in title as lessor had misrepresented the qualities and characteristics of the retail precinct. And he also accepted that the misrepresentation arguably resulted in damage of more than the statutory demand amount.
However, he says that clause 3.1 of the lease precluded Browns from raising a set-off, counterclaim or cross-demand as an excuse for not paying rent. The appeal court agreed with judge Osborne and dismissed the appeal by Browns.
Sign up to get the latest stories and insights delivered to your inbox – free, every day.
