MACKINTOSH AND HALL v REED AND ORS [2015] NZHC 823

MACKINTOSH AND HALL v REED AND ORS [2015] NZHC 823

Interim injunctions were granted in part: the grandchildren (second and third plaintiffs) may remain in possession of Halkett and Cridges and retain machinery pending further order provided they pay assessed rent and all outgoings from 7 March 2015 (rent to be split half to the estate and half to Philip) and subject to lease terms as modified; Philip is restrained from entering those properties. The decision rests on preservation of the status quo to avoid irreparable harm to applicants, adequate compensation by rent, and the trustees' duty to obtain market rental pending final determination.

Citation
[2015] NZHC 823
Parties
First Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants: J B Mackintosh and M C Hall; Second Plaintiff: M W Reed; Third Plaintiff: S T Reed; First Defendant and Counterclaimant: P D Thomas; Second Defendant: E M Marr; Third Defendant: A M Syme
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
23 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Estate, Partnership and Property Dispute (high Court, Christchurch) / Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction (hearing and Judgment)
Outcome
Interim injunction granted in part on terms; applicants permitted to remain in possession subject to payment obligations; costs reserved
Legal Topics
Interim Injunction, Possession and Co Owner Rights, Promissory Estoppel, Testamentary Promises, Family Protection, Rental/occupation
Estates and Trusts Property Law Equity Partnership Law Civil Procedure Interim Injunction Possession and Co Owner Rights Promissory Estoppel +3 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J B Mackintosh and M C Hall

First Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants

M W Reed

Second Plaintiff

S T Reed

Third Plaintiff

P D Thomas

First Defendant and Counterclaimant

E M Marr

Second Defendant

A M Syme

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Estate, Partnership and Property Dispute (high Court, Christchurch) / Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction (hearing and Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants (grandsons) have an arguable proprietary or lease entitlement deriving from promises by deceased co-owner
  2. 2 Whether there is a serious question to be tried
  3. 3 Where the balance of convenience lies for an interlocutory injunction

Ratio Decidendi

Interim injunctions were granted in part: the grandchildren (second and third plaintiffs) may remain in possession of Halkett and Cridges and retain machinery pending further order provided they pay assessed rent and all outgoings from 7 March 2015 (rent to be split half to the estate and half to Philip) and subject to lease terms as modified; Philip is restrained from entering those properties. The decision rests on preservation of the status quo to avoid irreparable harm to applicants, adequate compensation by rent, and the trustees' duty to obtain market rental pending final determination.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted in part on terms; applicants permitted to remain in possession subject to payment obligations; costs reserved

Orders

  • Second plaintiff (M W Reed) to remain in possession of Halkett farm and retain all machinery in his possession; first defendant restrained from entering Halkett pending further order; occupancy on terms of deed of lease annexed as exhibit N to affidavit of P D Thomas sworn 23 March 2015 but excluding the provision...
  • Third plaintiff (S T Reed) to remain in possession of Cridges farm and retain all machinery in his possession; first defendant restrained from entering Cridges pending further order; occupancy on terms of deed of lease annexed as exhibit O to affidavit of P D Thomas sworn 23 March 2015 but excluding the provision as...