T A Dellaca v PDL Industries Ltd
| T A Dellaca Ltd v PDL Industries Ltd | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | High Court of New Zealand |
| Full case name | T A Dellaca Ltd v PDL Industries Ltd |
| Decided | 20 November 1991 |
| Citation(s) | [1992] 3 NZLR 88 |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Tipping J |
T A Dellaca Ltd v PDL Industries Ltd [1992] 3 NZLR 88 is a cited case in New Zealand law regarding the requirement of some form of signature on a document required under the Contracts Enforcement Act 1956.[1][page needed]
References[edit]
- R D Mulholland, "Part performance: Back to classical theory" in "Law of contract" [1993] NZLJ 109. See further pages 291 and 361.
- The Abridgement of New Zealand Case Law. Permanent Supplement (No 5) to Volumes 1 to 18. Butterworths. Wellington. 1995. Pages 217 and 1244. Google
- New Zealand Recent Law Review 1994. Page 35.
- [1994] NZLJ 396 and 397
- [1997] NZLJ 104
- (2000) New Zealand Law Journal 196 and 197
- Butterworths Current Law Digest. 2004. Page 116. Google
- Butterworths Current Law. 1992. Paragraphs 202 and 264. Google
- Butterworths Current Law. 1993. Pages 250 and 257. Google
- (1998) 13 Journal of Contract Law 111
- Stephen Todd and Jeremy Finn. Contract Law in New Zealand. Fourth Edition. Wolters Kluwer. 2019. Note 412.
- David Wright. Remedies. Federation Press. 2010. Page 174. Google
- I C F Spry. The Principles of Equitable Remedies. Fifth Edition. LBC Information Services. 1997. Page 267.
- Stephen Mason. Electronic Signatures in Law. Third Edition. Cambridge University Press. 2012. Pages 51 and 64.
- ^ Chetwin, Maree; Graw, Stephen; Tiong, Raymond (2006). An introduction to the Law of Contract in New Zealand (4th ed.). Thomson Brookers. ISBN 0-86472-555-8.
 | This article relating to case law in New Zealand is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |