Re Meyer [2021] NZHC 138

Re Meyer [2021] NZHC 138

Failure to apply within the three‑month period in s9B(2) does not automatically bar the Court from ordering continuation under s9B(3)(a); where no s21 removal application exists the Court may direct continuation in the interests of justice and alternatively exercise inherent jurisdiction to do so; accordingly the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] NZHC 138
Parties
Applicant/administrator: Elaine Margaret Black; Applicant/administrator: Janet Raelene Templeton; Deceased: Graeme Geoffrey Meyer (Deceased)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
11 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Application Under Administration Act 1969 S 9 B / Judgment on Application (hearing 11 February 2021)
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Continuation of Administration, Enduring Power of Attorney, S9 B Interpretation, Inherent Jurisdiction, Dispensing With Service, Originating Application
Succession Estate Administration Elder Law Civil Procedure Statutory Interpretation Continuation of Administration Enduring Power of Attorney S9 B Interpretation +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elaine Margaret Black

Applicant/administrator

Janet Raelene Templeton

Applicant/administrator

Graeme Geoffrey Meyer (Deceased)

Deceased

Procedural Posture

Application Under Administration Act 1969 S 9 B / Judgment on Application (hearing 11 February 2021)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to apply within 3 months under s9B(2) precludes relief under s9B(3)(a)
  2. 2 Whether the Court can direct continuation of administration despite delay
  3. 3 Whether the Court can exercise inherent jurisdiction to allow continuation

Ratio Decidendi

Failure to apply within the three‑month period in s9B(2) does not automatically bar the Court from ordering continuation under s9B(3)(a); where no s21 removal application exists the Court may direct continuation in the interests of justice and alternatively exercise inherent jurisdiction to do so; accordingly the applicants' administration was continued for six months and service dispensed with.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • The substantive application is to be dealt with as an originating application.
  • Service of the application is dispensed with.