HOROWHENUA 11 (LAKE) PART RESERVATION TRUST v TAUEKI [2017] NZHC 4

HOROWHENUA 11 (LAKE) PART RESERVATION TRUST v TAUEKI [2017] NZHC 4

The Court concluded the prerequisites for an arrest order were met: the injunction and possession order were clear, the liable party had notice (he appealed) and affidavit evidence demonstrated wilful and inexcusable non-compliance; accordingly an arrest order was authorised but its execution was deferred, with the order not to be issued before 10 March 2017 and the liable party liable to be arrested on or after that date to be brought before the High Court on 13 March 2017 at 10:00 am.

Citation
[2017] NZAR 221
Parties
Entitled Party: Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Part Reservation Trust; Liable Party: Philip Dean Taueki
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
10 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for an Arrest Order Under Part 17, Subpart 7 of the High Court Rules / On the Papers (application for Enforcement)
Outcome
Arrest order authorised but restrained until 10 March 2017; liable party may be arrested on or after 10 March 2017 and brought before the High Court in Wellington on 13 March 2017 at 10:00 am.
Legal Topics
Arrest Order, Enforcement of Judgment, Injunction Enforcement, Vacant Possession, Wilful Non Compliance
Civil Enforcement High Court Procedure Māori Land Law Property Law Arrest Order Enforcement of Judgment Injunction Enforcement Vacant Possession +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Part Reservation Trust

Entitled Party

Philip Dean Taueki

Liable Party

Procedural Posture

Application for an Arrest Order Under Part 17, Subpart 7 of the High Court Rules / On the Papers (application for Enforcement)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original injunction/order was clear and unambiguous
  2. 2 Whether the liable party had notice of the order
  3. 3 Whether the liable party wilfully and inexcusably failed to comply

Ratio Decidendi

The Court concluded the prerequisites for an arrest order were met: the injunction and possession order were clear, the liable party had notice (he appealed) and affidavit evidence demonstrated wilful and inexcusable non-compliance; accordingly an arrest order was authorised but its execution was deferred, with the order not to be issued before 10 March 2017 and the liable party liable to be arrested on or after that date to be brought before the High Court on 13 March 2017 at 10:00 am.

Court Disposition

Arrest order authorised but restrained until 10 March 2017; liable party may be arrested on or after 10 March 2017 and brought before the High Court in Wellington on 13 March 2017 at 10:00 am.

Orders

  • Judgment endorsed with delivery time 4.00 pm on 17 January 2017 pursuant to r11.5 of the High Court Rules
  • An arrest order may not be issued before 10 March 2017