GREIG v JEFFERY-JONES [2018] NZHC 833

GREIG v JEFFERY-JONES [2018] NZHC 833

The charging order was extended because the applicant reasonably delayed enforcement pending resolution of related appeals and costs proceedings, the application was made within time, a two-year extension was necessary to protect the applicant's position given pending appeal rights, and the without-notice filing was justified to avoid undue delay and prejudice.

Citation
[2018] NZHC 833
Parties
Entitled Party: Bruce James Greig; Liable Party: Rebecca Margery Jeffery-Jones
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
27 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Charging Order Enforcement / Civil Debt / Application for Extension of Charging Order (determined on the Papers)
Outcome
Extension granted
Legal Topics
Charging Order, Extension of Charging Order, Enforcement of Judgment, Costs, Appeal Rights, High Court Rules
Civil Enforcement Family Law Civil Procedure Charging Order Extension of Charging Order Enforcement of Judgment Costs Appeal Rights +1 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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bruce James Greig

Entitled Party

Rebecca Margery Jeffery-Jones

Liable Party

Procedural Posture

Charging Order Enforcement / Civil Debt / Application for Extension of Charging Order (determined on the Papers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the charging order should be extended under r 17.52(2) High Court Rules
  2. 2 Whether a without-notice application was justified under r 7.23(2) High Court Rules
  3. 3 What period of extension is necessary

Ratio Decidendi

The charging order was extended because the applicant reasonably delayed enforcement pending resolution of related appeals and costs proceedings, the application was made within time, a two-year extension was necessary to protect the applicant's position given pending appeal rights, and the without-notice filing was justified to avoid undue delay and prejudice.

Court Disposition

Extension granted

Orders

  • The effect of the charging order issued on 27 April 2016 is extended for a period of two years.
  • Leave is reserved to the entitled party to apply for relief under rr 17.44 or 7.49 High Court Rules or otherwise.