NEW ZEALAND MĀORI COUNCIL v ANGELA JUNE FOULKES [2014] NZHC 1777

NEW ZEALAND MĀORI COUNCIL v ANGELA JUNE FOULKES [2014] NZHC 1777

The Court held that (1) the Trust's criteria requiring Tribunal registration, clustering and Crown-recognised mandate are not unlawful or inconsistent with the Trust Deed, although trustees must be willing to consider exceptions and guard against inappropriate bundling; (2) trustees may adopt application processes and policies but funding approvals under cl 10 remain non-delegable and trustees must have applications/business plans before them; (3) trustees may employ and remunerate staff as necessary and may delegate implementational or ministerial functions to staff or committees, but not non-delegable discretionary decisions; (4) trustees may and should obtain legal advice and the chief...

Citation
[2014] NZHC 1777
Parties
First Applicant / Māori Appointor Constituent: New Zealand Māori Council; Second Applicant / Māori Trustee: Sir Edward Taihakurei Durie; Third Applicant / Māori Trustee: Cletus Maanu Paul; First Respondent / Crown Trustee (chair): Angela June Foulkes; Second Respondent / Māori Trustee: Alan Parekura Torohinaharonga; Third Respondent / Crown Trustee: Alexander John Wilson; Fourth Respondent / Māori Appointor Constituent: Federation of Māori Authorities Incorporated; Interested Party / Crown: Attorney-General (Crown); Amici Curiae: G M Illingworth QC & P J Andrew
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
29 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Directions Under S 66 Trustee Act 1956 (interpretation and Administration of Crown Forestry Rental Trust Deed) / High Court Judgment Resolving Agreed Issues After Hearing
Outcome
Judgment for applicants and respondents on agreed issues in part; declaratory and directional relief as summarised; certain relief declined (no recall of Dobson J order appointing interim alternate; no extension of Haronga term; no pre-emptive costs orders)
Legal Topics
Trust Deed Interpretation, Delegation and Powers of Trustees, Conflict of Interest, Judicial Review and S66 Trustee Act Applications, Trust Fund Distribution Criteria, Appointment and Removal of Trustees, Costs of Trust Litigation
Trusts and Equity Administrative and Public Law Constitutional/treaty Law Trust Deed Interpretation Delegation and Powers of Trustees Conflict of Interest Judicial Review and S66 Trustee Act Applications Trust Fund Distribution Criteria +2 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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

New Zealand Māori Council

First Applicant / Māori Appointor Constituent

Sir Edward Taihakurei Durie

Second Applicant / Māori Trustee

Cletus Maanu Paul

Third Applicant / Māori Trustee

Angela June Foulkes

First Respondent / Crown Trustee (chair)

Alan Parekura Torohinaharonga

Second Respondent / Māori Trustee

Alexander John Wilson

Third Respondent / Crown Trustee

Federation of Māori Authorities Incorporated

Fourth Respondent / Māori Appointor Constituent

Attorney-General (Crown)

Interested Party / Crown

G M Illingworth QC & P J Andrew

Amici Curiae

Procedural Posture

Application for Directions Under S 66 Trustee Act 1956 (interpretation and Administration of Crown Forestry Rental Trust Deed) / High Court Judgment Resolving Agreed Issues After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Are Trust criteria for Claimant recognition (registration, clustering, Crown-recognised mandate) inconsistent with the Trust Deed?
  2. 2 Whether trustees can approve payments under cl 10 absent an application from a Claimant
  3. 3 Whether trustees may adopt policies affecting substance of underlying claims or directly instruct experts for Claimants

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that (1) the Trust's criteria requiring Tribunal registration, clustering and Crown-recognised mandate are not unlawful or inconsistent with the Trust Deed, although trustees must be willing to consider exceptions and guard against inappropriate bundling; (2) trustees may adopt application processes and policies but funding approvals under cl 10 remain non-delegable and trustees must have applications/business plans before them; (3) trustees may employ and remunerate staff as necessary and may delegate implementational or ministerial functions to staff or committees, but not non-delegable discretionary decisions; (4) trustees may and should obtain legal advice and the chief...

Court Disposition

Judgment for applicants and respondents on agreed issues in part; declaratory and directional relief as summarised; certain relief declined (no recall of Dobson J order appointing interim alternate; no extension of Haronga term; no pre-emptive costs orders)

Orders

  • Declaration that Trust criteria requiring Waitangi Tribunal registration, clustering and Crown-recognised mandate are not inconsistent with the Trust Deed but trustees must consider appropriate exceptions and guard against inappropriate bundling of claims
  • Direction that approval of funding under cl 10 is a non-delegable trustee discretion and trustees must be provided with the claimant's application, business plan and funding proposal when deciding approvals