HARPER V BEAMISH HC NAP CIV-2009-441-000636

HARPER V BEAMISH HC NAP CIV-2009-441-000636

The 2004 transfer was an internal family restructuring, not a third‑party sale or disposition contemplated by the 2001 Deed; the plaintiffs consented to the 2004 Deed which vested the adjustment obligation in the new Beamish trustees, so no Awapai Sales Adjustment is payable now; rectification and mistake defences...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-ddf31317_4655_4b36_a5ee_19f236e81d07.pdf
Parties
First Plaintiff: Melanie Joy Harper; Second Plaintiff: Clair Fiona Macintyre; Third Plaintiff: C F Engels Trust (by Clair Fiona Macintyre and Arthur Jack Smithwick Harper); Defendant Trustee: Dorothy Joy Beamish; Defendant Trustee: Simon Noel Beamish; Defendant Trustee: Graham Cameron Edwards
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
8 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Trust/property Dispute / Judgment (reserved Judgment Delivered)
Outcome
Plaintiffs' claim dismissed; judgment for defendants
Legal Topics
Deed Interpretation, Sale and Disposition of Land, Consent to Covenant, Rectification, Contractual Mistake (contractual Mistakes Act 1977), Covenant and Indemnity, Awapai Sales Adjustment
Trusts Contract Law Property Law Equity Civil Procedure Deed Interpretation Sale and Disposition of Land Consent to Covenant +4 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Melanie Joy Harper

First Plaintiff

Clair Fiona Macintyre

Second Plaintiff

C F Engels Trust (by Clair Fiona Macintyre and Arthur Jack Smithwick Harper)

Third Plaintiff

Dorothy Joy Beamish

Defendant Trustee

Simon Noel Beamish

Defendant Trustee

Graham Cameron Edwards

Defendant Trustee

Procedural Posture

Civil Trust/property Dispute / Judgment (reserved Judgment Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2004 transfer triggered the Awapai Sales Adjustment in the 2001 Deed
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs consented to the 2004 deed such that they waived or transferred rights
  3. 3 Whether rectification of the 2001 Deed is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The 2004 transfer was an internal family restructuring, not a third‑party sale or disposition contemplated by the 2001 Deed; the plaintiffs consented to the 2004 Deed which vested the adjustment obligation in the new Beamish trustees, so no Awapai Sales Adjustment is payable now; rectification and mistake defences need not be determined.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' claim dismissed; judgment for defendants

Orders

  • Judgment for the defendants against each of the first, second and third plaintiffs
  • Costs reserved; parties to file memoranda on costs