Urquhart v Look

[2015] NZHC 623

IN THE HIGH COURTOF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2015-404-000641 [2015] NZHC 623

BETWEEN

BRUCE WILLIAM URQUHART AS

EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE RICHARD JOHN SHEEHAN Plaintiff

AND

ROWENA TRACEY PHOEBE MARY LOOK

Defendant

CIV-2015-404-000295

AND BETWEEN              BRUCE WILLIAM URQUHART AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE RICHARD JOHN

SHEEHAN Plaintiff

ANDROWENA TRACEY PHOEBE MARY LOOK

Defendant

Hearing:	31 March 2015
Appearances:	N Taefi for Plaintiff No appearance for Defendant
Judgment:	31 March 2015

ORAL JUDGMENT OF VENNING J

Solicitors:           Roger Gordon Donnell, Auckland

Copy to:            I F Williams/N Taefi, Auckland

URQUHART v LOOK [2015] NZHC 623 [31 March 2015]

[1]      There are two proceedings before the Court, one an application for summary judgment, the other an application that a notice of claim be removed.   Both proceedings are brought by the executor of the estate of Mr Sheehan.

[2]      The application for summary judgment has been served.  The application that the notice of claim be removed has not.

[3]      The defendant has taken no steps in response to the application for summary judgment.

[4]      I am satisfied on the basis of the affidavit evidence before the Court there is no reasonably arguable defence to the application for summary judgment for possession and damages calculated as rental for wrongful possession.

[5]      Accordingly, there will be judgment for the plaintiff as follows:

(a)       an order that  the defendant deliver up possession of the property described in the statement of claim;

(b)reserving leave to seek any further consequential orders that may be necessary;

(c)       an order for damages and related relief for lost rental from the date of issue of the proceedings to judgment in the sum of $3,960.

[6]      Costs to the plaintiff on a 2B basis of $8,159 together with disbursements of

$1,630.

[7]      The application that the notice of claim be removed is adjourned for call in the list on 21 April 2015.  In making the above orders the defendant has a right to pursue any related claim arising out of any relationship with the deceased in the

Court in the usual way.

Venning J