HARVEY & ORS v GATESHEAD INVESTMENTS LIMITED & ORS [2013] NZHC 2253
The Court held the joint tenancy between Mr and Mrs Harvey was severed in equity by mutual agreement (and alternatively by course of dealing) prior to Mr Harvey's death; that equitable severance did not deplete the bounty available to creditors at the date of the Agreement and therefore s 47 PRA did not reverse the severance; accordingly Mr Harvey's half interest did not vest in the Official Assignee and the application to vest the entire estate in the Official Assignee was dismissed.
- Citation
- [2013] NZHC 2253
- Parties
- First Plaintiff/counterclaim Defendant: Christopher Michael Harvey; Second Plaintiff: 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/third Counterclaim Plaintiff: Beta Pacific Corporation Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 30 August 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Property and Insolvency (severance of Joint Tenancy) / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application by judgment creditors to vest entire fee simple estate in the Official Assignee dismissed; joint tenancy found severed and Mr Harvey's half interest does not vest in Official Assignee
- Legal Topics
- Severance of Joint Tenancy, Right of Survivorship, Property (relationships) Act 1976 S47, Voidable Transactions, Charging Order, Tenancy in Common, Mutual Agreement, Course of Dealing
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Christopher Michael Harvey
First Plaintiff/counterclaim Defendant
Rachel Susan Harvey
Second Plaintiff
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/third Counterclaim Plaintiff
Procedural Posture
Civil Property and Insolvency (severance of Joint Tenancy) / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the joint tenancy between Mr and Mrs Harvey was severed prior to Mr Harvey's death
- 2 Whether severance occurred by mutual agreement or by a course of dealing
- 3 Whether s 47(2) Property (Relationships) Act 1976 voids or reverses any equitable severance and the effect on creditors/Official Assignee
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held the joint tenancy between Mr and Mrs Harvey was severed in equity by mutual agreement (and alternatively by course of dealing) prior to Mr Harvey's death; that equitable severance did not deplete the bounty available to creditors at the date of the Agreement and therefore s 47 PRA did not reverse the severance; accordingly Mr Harvey's half interest did not vest in the Official Assignee and the application to vest the entire estate in the Official Assignee was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application by judgment creditors to vest entire fee simple estate in the Official Assignee dismissed; joint tenancy found severed and Mr Harvey's half interest does not vest in Official Assignee
Orders
- The application by the counterclaim plaintiffs for an order vesting the entire estate in fee simple in the Property in the Official Assignee is dismissed
- Executor (counterclaim defendant) entitled to costs on a category 2B basis in preliminary view; if not agreed executor to file memorandum within 20 working days and judgment creditors to file any response within 10 days
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