Paul and Clare Dolheguy v CAC303 & Sonia Stott [2015] NZREADT 27 [pdf, 225 KB]
...happen because the neighbour had a garage at the rear of his property which could only be accessed along the right of way to the appellant’s property. She should not have assumed that was unlikely to happen due to the existing fencing appearing relatively permanent. However, she did not answer any questions from the appellants in an inadequate or misleading way. [78] One might have expected that the appellants would have observed that to be the situation and, in any case, would hav...