Talk:Chiswick Investments v Pevats

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

New Zealand: Law Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the New Zealand law task force.

Untitled

removed deletion tag, as is notable, has been cited in the NZLR, I can cite 3 law text books that mention this case, and if adjust google search to just "chiswick" and "Pevats", gets far more positive results than 7

Well, why don't you cite 3 law textbooks? Vanjagenije (talk) 22:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

well I don't need to cite these 3 law books, like I have not done for the 50 other NZ law articles I have submitted on Wikipedia without challenge. I did cite the NZLR citation, and that in itself meets wiki's notability criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwisheriff (talk • contribs) 02:30, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]