In Kraal & anor v EQC & anor  NZCA 13 the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the High Court in Kraal & anor v EQC & anor  NZHC 919 to the effect that the Council imposition of the notice under s124 Building Act 2004 preventing occupation/building work was not physical damage to the insured house so there was no cover from EQC/Allianz. This case was run as preliminary issue case for the owners by a law firm that acts for Southern Response. Surprisingly they do not appear to have run the argument that the inability to legally repair the house by reason of the s124 notice made the property a total loss. This is an argument approved of by Courts in USA and Canada, but has never had to be judicially decided in NZ yet. It is still an argument available to homeowners of properties the subject of s124 notices.
http://www.grantshand.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/logo.png 0 0 Grant Shand http://www.grantshand.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/logo.png Grant Shand2015-04-04 02:24:232015-09-23 07:50:20Kraal v EQC (s124 notices)