GLASGOW HARLEY TRUSTEE LTD & J MCLAUGHLIN, as trustees of the Ashley Trust v M MCLAUGHLIN & A MCLAUGHLIN [2018] NZHC 290

GLASGOW HARLEY TRUSTEE LTD & J MCLAUGHLIN, as trustees of the Ashley Trust v M MCLAUGHLIN & A MCLAUGHLIN [2018] NZHC 290

Apply Erceg disclosure balancing test and litigation privilege: withhold or redact contested material where litigation privilege applies or where passages comprise personal confidential matters or privileged witness communications; refuse a blanket suppression across both Beddoe and the substantive 52 proceeding; disclose non‑privileged material that is relevant to the Beddoe issues (including certain affidavit sentences and documents showing lack of insurance); orders of suppression limited to the present Beddoe applications and remain in force until further order of the Court.

Citation
[2018] NZHC 290
Parties
Applicant Trustee: Glasgow Harley Trustee Limited; Applicant Trustee: John McLaughlin; Respondent Beneficiary: Mark James McLaughlin; Respondent Beneficiary: Andrew Ashley McLaughlin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
1 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Beddoe Application Under Trustee Act 1956 With Related Substantive Hostile Beneficiary Proceeding (civ 2017 442 52) / Interlocutory – Suppression/confidentiality Application in Support of Beddoe Proceedings
Outcome
Application partially granted: specific affidavit passages and exhibit pages upheld as confidential or subject to litigation privilege and to remain redacted/withheld; other previously redacted passages and documents ordered disclosed; suppression limited to the Beddoe proceeding pending further order and not...
Legal Topics
Beddoe Application, Confidentiality of Court Material, Litigation Privilege, Disclosure to Beneficiaries, Trustee Indemnity, Discovery Issues
Trusts Civil Procedure Evidence Costs Privilege Beddoe Application Confidentiality of Court Material Litigation Privilege +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glasgow Harley Trustee Limited

Applicant Trustee

John McLaughlin

Applicant Trustee

Mark James McLaughlin

Respondent Beneficiary

Andrew Ashley McLaughlin

Respondent Beneficiary

Procedural Posture

Beddoe Application Under Trustee Act 1956 With Related Substantive Hostile Beneficiary Proceeding (civ 2017 442 52) / Interlocutory – Suppression/confidentiality Application in Support of Beddoe Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether contested material should be suppressed from beneficiaries and withheld from court file access
  2. 2 Whether litigation privilege or legal professional privilege applies to contested documents and affidavit passages
  3. 3 Whether trustees can obtain Beddoe relief in hostile litigation against beneficiaries and the proper scope and duration of confidentiality orders

Ratio Decidendi

Apply Erceg disclosure balancing test and litigation privilege: withhold or redact contested material where litigation privilege applies or where passages comprise personal confidential matters or privileged witness communications; refuse a blanket suppression across both Beddoe and the substantive 52 proceeding; disclose non‑privileged material that is relevant to the Beddoe issues (including certain affidavit sentences and documents showing lack of insurance); orders of suppression limited to the present Beddoe applications and remain in force until further order of the Court.

Court Disposition

Application partially granted: specific affidavit passages and exhibit pages upheld as confidential or subject to litigation privilege and to remain redacted/withheld; other previously redacted passages and documents ordered disclosed; suppression limited to the Beddoe proceeding pending further order and not...

Orders

  • Continue redaction of J D M McLaughlin affidavit paragraphs 37–39 and 42–43 (personal matters)
  • Continue redaction of J D M McLaughlin affidavit paragraphs 153–155 and 182 and corresponding Bundle 3 exhibits that attract litigation privilege