MĀORI TRUSTEE v SMITH [2019] NZHC 1220

MĀORI TRUSTEE v SMITH [2019] NZHC 1220

The Court concluded there was no serious question to be tried because the substantive disputes had been finally addressed by the Māori Land Court and appeals had not been properly pursued; accordingly the interim injunction was refused and the Court declined to restrain enforcement, but granted a limited stay delaying the issue of arrest warrants until 4 June 2019 to allow an orderly exit.

Citation
[2019] NZHC 1220
Parties
Entitled Party: Māori Trustee; Liable Party: Bruce Smith; Liable Party: Ruby Smith; Liable Party: Cole Smith; Liable Party: Jarna Smith; Liable Party: Kreslea Smith
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
27 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Injunction and Leave to Issue Arrest Warrants / Urgent Without Notice Interim Judgment and Temporary Stay of Enforcement
Outcome
Application for interim injunction dismissed; leave to issue arrest warrants not restrained but their issue stayed until 4 June 2019 to permit orderly withdrawal
Legal Topics
Interim Injunction, Arrest Orders, Administration of Māori Land, Enforcement of Court Orders, Stay Application, Role of Police
Trusts Māori Land Law Property Law Civil Procedure Judgment Enforcement Criminal Enforcement Procedure Interim Injunction Arrest Orders +4 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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Māori Trustee

Entitled Party

Bruce Smith

Liable Party

Ruby Smith

Liable Party

Cole Smith

Liable Party

Jarna Smith

Liable Party

Kreslea Smith

Liable Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Injunction and Leave to Issue Arrest Warrants / Urgent Without Notice Interim Judgment and Temporary Stay of Enforcement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a serious question to be tried such that interim injunction should issue
  2. 2 Whether the High Court should restrain enforcement of Māori Land Court orders and arrest warrants
  3. 3 Whether matters have already been finally determined by the Māori Land Court and appeal process

Ratio Decidendi

The Court concluded there was no serious question to be tried because the substantive disputes had been finally addressed by the Māori Land Court and appeals had not been properly pursued; accordingly the interim injunction was refused and the Court declined to restrain enforcement, but granted a limited stay delaying the issue of arrest warrants until 4 June 2019 to allow an orderly exit.

Court Disposition

Application for interim injunction dismissed; leave to issue arrest warrants not restrained but their issue stayed until 4 June 2019 to permit orderly withdrawal

Orders

  • Application for interim injunction dismissed
  • Issue of arrest warrants stayed/delayed until 4 June 2019