ASH v SINGH [2019] NZHC 2878
Application dismissed because the balance of convenience favoured refusing a separate priority trial: a decision on the first cause of action was unlikely to finally resolve the litigation (the third cause of action alleging unauthorised loans would survive), a preliminary hearing risked derailing the scheduled 2021 trials because appeals were likely and unlikely to be resolved in time, credibility issues were better assessed by a single judge hearing all evidence, and the plaintiff would be prejudiced by needing to attend multiple hearings.
- Citation
- [2019] NZHC 2878
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Gabriel Sebastian Ash; First Defendant: Mahendra Singh as Trustee of the Shean Singh Family Trust; Second Defendant: Geoffrey Hugh Bourchier as Trustee of the Shean Singh Family Trust; Third Defendant: Darsan Singh as Trustee of the Shean Singh Family Trust
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 1 November 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under the Trustee Act 1956 and Inherent Jurisdiction for Removal/substitution of Trustees and Rectification of Trust Deed / Interlocutory Application for a Separate/prior Trial of the Plaintiff's First Cause of Action (application Heard 1 November 2019 and Dismissed)
- Outcome
- Application to determine the plaintiff's first cause of action in priority dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Rectification of Trust Deed, Variation of Trust, Removal and Substitution of Trustees, Constructive Trust, Trustee Maladministration, Separate Trials / Severance of Issues
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gabriel Sebastian Ash
Plaintiff
Mahendra Singh as Trustee of the Shean Singh Family Trust
First Defendant
Geoffrey Hugh Bourchier as Trustee of the Shean Singh Family Trust
Second Defendant
Darsan Singh as Trustee of the Shean Singh Family Trust
Third Defendant
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Trustee Act 1956 and Inherent Jurisdiction for Removal/substitution of Trustees and Rectification of Trust Deed / Interlocutory Application for a Separate/prior Trial of the Plaintiff's First Cause of Action (application Heard 1 November 2019 and Dismissed)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1996 Deed of Variation adding Mrs Darsan Singh as beneficiary was valid or capable of rectification
- 2 Whether the Court should order a separate/priority two-day trial of the plaintiff's first cause of action under r 10.4 High Court Rules 2016
- 3 Whether determination of the first cause of action would dispose of or substantially reduce the issues in the overall litigation
Ratio Decidendi
Application dismissed because the balance of convenience favoured refusing a separate priority trial: a decision on the first cause of action was unlikely to finally resolve the litigation (the third cause of action alleging unauthorised loans would survive), a preliminary hearing risked derailing the scheduled 2021 trials because appeals were likely and unlikely to be resolved in time, credibility issues were better assessed by a single judge hearing all evidence, and the plaintiff would be prejudiced by needing to attend multiple hearings.
Court Disposition
Application to determine the plaintiff's first cause of action in priority dismissed
Orders
- Application dismissed
- Costs: costs against the trustees (calculated on a 2B basis) are abated by 40% on the sum otherwise prescribed; if there is any dispute as to quantification, memoranda may be filed
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