TEAM BARRY LIMITED AND ORS V KEMP AND ORS HC AK CIV 2003-404-5593
The Court allowed Tuaman to draw reasonable legal costs and approved earlier invoices because Tua's proprietary claims to the fund were contestable and not demonstrably strong at interlocutory stage, substantial parts of the fund derived from assets in Tuaman's name (Pakiri) where an express trust claim had been...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- openlaw-e7470fed_d92a_4343_b6bc_6aed9d253336.pdf
- Parties
- First Plaintiff: Team Barry Limited; Second Plaintiff: Tuaman Inc Limited; Third Plaintiff: Martin Pugh; Fourth Plaintiff: Kevin Barry; Second Defendant: Luke Andrew Bowell Kemp; Third Defendant: Mafaufau Sita (aka David Tua); Counterclaim Defendant: Sally Fergusson Cross and Mark Gill (as trustees of The Baron and Lunar Trust); Interested Party / Sub Mortgagee: Midland Funds Management Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 10 February 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Dispute Involving Claims to Frozen Assets, Trusts, and Company Disputes / Interlocutory Application for Payment of Legal and Expert Costs From Frozen Funds (hearing and Directions)
- Outcome
- Application granted in part: Tuaman may meet reasonable legal and approved expert costs from the frozen fund subject to conditions and without prejudicing Midland's prior rights.
- Legal Topics
- Frozen Funds, Payment of Legal Costs From Restrained Assets, Express Trust, Resulting Trust, Constructive Trust, Tracing, Rescission of Contract
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Team Barry Limited
First Plaintiff
Tuaman Inc Limited
Second Plaintiff
Martin Pugh
Third Plaintiff
Kevin Barry
Fourth Plaintiff
Luke Andrew Bowell Kemp
Second Defendant
Mafaufau Sita (aka David Tua)
Third Defendant
Sally Fergusson Cross and Mark Gill (as trustees of The Baron and Lunar Trust)
Counterclaim Defendant
Midland Funds Management Limited
Interested Party / Sub Mortgagee
Procedural Posture
Civil Dispute Involving Claims to Frozen Assets, Trusts, and Company Disputes / Interlocutory Application for Payment of Legal and Expert Costs From Frozen Funds (hearing and Directions)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the frozen fund is a trust fund belonging to the defendant (Tua) or property of the company (Tuaman)
- 2 Whether Tuaman may draw reasonable legal and expert costs from the frozen fund while claims are contested
- 3 What limits and conditions the Court should impose on any payment from the fund
Ratio Decidendi
The Court allowed Tuaman to draw reasonable legal costs and approved earlier invoices because Tua's proprietary claims to the fund were contestable and not demonstrably strong at interlocutory stage, substantial parts of the fund derived from assets in Tuaman's name (Pakiri) where an express trust claim had been dismissed by Williams J, and provisional accounting indicated available sums; access is permitted subject to court approval of invoices and estimates, limits on expert costs, and Midland's pre-existing security rights.
Court Disposition
Application granted in part: Tuaman may meet reasonable legal and approved expert costs from the frozen fund subject to conditions and without prejudicing Midland's prior rights.
Orders
- Invoices of Gibson Sheat and Mr J D Haigh annexed to Haigh affidavit sworn 16 April 2008 to be paid from the fund
- Gibson Sheat and Mr Chisholm to submit particularised invoices for further costs to date for Court approval and, as approved, those invoices to be paid from the fund
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment