Ruling finds proposed appeal moot due to underlying appeal’s abandonment
In a case arising from a breach of funding arrangements in connection with a property development, New Zealand’s Supreme Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, given the deemed abandonment of the substantive appeal.
In Golden Touch Investment and Trade Company Limited v Zhu [2025] NZSC 196, the first applicant owned a five-unit development in Auckland. Meanwhile, the second applicant was a director of the first applicant and a guarantor under a mortgage granted to the first respondent.
The first applicant breached its funding arrangements. The property’s mortgagee sale then resulted in a shortfall.
In three separate proceedings, New Zealand’s High Court granted summary judgment applications in favour of all four respondents and issued possession orders in the second respondent’s favour.
Before the Court of Appeal, the two applicants brought their substantive appeal against the High Court judgment.
The applicants applied for a stay of execution of the judgment pending the determination of their appeal. They also applied for leave to appeal the High Court’s refusal to grant leave to appeal.
New Zealand’s Court of Appeal rejected the requested stay and leave. Before the Supreme Court, the applicants applied for leave to appeal the denial of the stay.
On 17 October 2025, the court deemed the substantive appeal abandoned. The registry tried to contact the applicants multiple times. However, the applicants filed no submissions.
On 12 November 2025, the registry instructed the applicants to file and serve their submissions by 17 November 2025.
The registry gave the respondents until 25 November 2025 to file and serve their submissions. The registry informed the parties that the court would decide the application based on the material in the record.
The Supreme Court of New Zealand dismissed the application for leave to appeal and ordered the two applicants to pay the first, second, and third respondents a single set of costs of $2,500.
The Supreme Court did not consider it in the interests of justice to grant the application seeking leave to appeal.
The Supreme Court acknowledged that the proposed appeal was moot, given the deemed abandonment of the substantive appeal. The Supreme Court noted that the applicants abandoned their application for leave to appeal when they failed to file submissions.
