HARVEY & ORS v GATESHEAD INVESTMENTS LIMITED & ORS [2014] NZHC 464

HARVEY & ORS v GATESHEAD INVESTMENTS LIMITED & ORS [2014] NZHC 464

Both parties achieved roughly equal and mutually offsetting substantive results: the judgment creditors succeeded at summary judgment in voiding the relationship property agreement and removing the PRA notice, while the executor succeeded at trial on severance of the joint tenancy preventing vesting by survivorship. Applying the Chilcott approach, the realistic appraisal of the end result mandated that costs lie where they fall.

Citation
[2014] NZHC 464
Parties
First Plaintiff/first Counterclaim Defendant: Christopher Michael Harvey; Second Plaintiff/second Counterclaim Defendant: Rachel Susan Harvey; Third Plaintiff: Richard James Parker; First Defendant/first Counterclaim Plaintiff: Gateshead Investments Limited; Second Defendant/second Counterclaim Plaintiff: Paranui Properties Limited; Third Defendant: Beta Pacific Corporation Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
13 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil (counterclaim) / Costs Application Following Judgment
Outcome
Costs lie where they fall; no costs awarded to either party.
Legal Topics
Relationship Property, Property (relationships) Act 1976 S47, Severance of Joint Tenancy, Survivorship, Costs Allocation, Summary Judgment
Property Law Insolvency/bankruptcy Civil Procedure Costs Relationship Property Property (relationships) Act 1976 S47 Severance of Joint Tenancy Survivorship +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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Michael Harvey

First Plaintiff/first Counterclaim Defendant

Rachel Susan Harvey

Second Plaintiff/second Counterclaim Defendant

Richard James Parker

Third Plaintiff

Gateshead Investments Limited

First Defendant/first Counterclaim Plaintiff

Paranui Properties Limited

Second Defendant/second Counterclaim Plaintiff

Beta Pacific Corporation Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (counterclaim) / Costs Application Following Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the relationship property agreement was void as against creditors under s47 PRA
  2. 2 Whether the joint tenancy between spouses had been severed prior to death
  3. 3 Whether the property vested by survivorship in the surviving spouse

Ratio Decidendi

Both parties achieved roughly equal and mutually offsetting substantive results: the judgment creditors succeeded at summary judgment in voiding the relationship property agreement and removing the PRA notice, while the executor succeeded at trial on severance of the joint tenancy preventing vesting by survivorship. Applying the Chilcott approach, the realistic appraisal of the end result mandated that costs lie where they fall.

Court Disposition

Costs lie where they fall; no costs awarded to either party.

Orders

  • Costs are to lie where they fall; no costs awarded in favour of either party.