JANE MAREE MURRELL v WILLIAM ELLIOTT HAMILTON [2013] NZHC 3241

JANE MAREE MURRELL v WILLIAM ELLIOTT HAMILTON [2013] NZHC 3241

Court found claimant made relevant contributions and held a reasonable expectation of an interest but because the property was owned by the W E Hamilton Family Trust throughout and claimant's case did not fall within recognised exceptions permitting a proprietary remedy against trust assets (interest arising before transfer, trustees' collective conscience engaged, or claim against settlor's separate interest), an alter ego argument could not be used to reach trust assets; accordingly constructive trust claim against the trust failed.

Citation
[2013] NZHC 3241
Parties
Plaintiff: Jane Maree Murrell; First Defendant: William Elliott Hamilton; Second Defendant: Geoffrey Mirkin; Third Defendant: W E Hamilton Trustee Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
5 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Constructive Trust Claim / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Trust, Alter Ego Trust, Sham Trust, Trust Administration, Valuation of Proprietary Remedy
Equity Trusts Property Law Family Law Relationship Property Constructive Trust Alter Ego Trust Sham Trust +2 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jane Maree Murrell

Plaintiff

William Elliott Hamilton

First Defendant

Geoffrey Mirkin

Second Defendant

W E Hamilton Trustee Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constructive Trust Claim / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant established a constructive trust over property owned by a family trust
  2. 2 What profit resulted from sale and what is claimant's entitlement
  3. 3 Whether the family trust is the defendant's alter ego so assets are available to satisfy the claim

Ratio Decidendi

Court found claimant made relevant contributions and held a reasonable expectation of an interest but because the property was owned by the W E Hamilton Family Trust throughout and claimant's case did not fall within recognised exceptions permitting a proprietary remedy against trust assets (interest arising before transfer, trustees' collective conscience engaged, or claim against settlor's separate interest), an alter ego argument could not be used to reach trust assets; accordingly constructive trust claim against the trust failed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Constructive trust claim dismissed; no constructive trust declared over assets of the W E Hamilton Family Trust