OWHETU BLOCK CHARITABLE TRUST V SADE HC WHA CIV 2012-488-103

OWHETU BLOCK CHARITABLE TRUST V SADE HC WHA CIV 2012-488-103

The court declined interim suspension because there was no real risk to trust assets given the requirement of multiple trustee signatures to operate funds, the imminent AGM providing beneficiary oversight, and the plausible innocent explanation for the payment; however, interim orders permitting operation of the bank account by three trustees (excluding the defendant) and requiring delivery of records were appropriate by consent.

Citation
openlaw-8bac3a30_f8f6_4064_9f67_5ec757b02d2f.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff Trustee: Philip Marsh; Plaintiff Trustee: Romer Mahanga; Plaintiff Trustee: Arepa Patira; Plaintiff Trustee: Morris Gilbert; Defendant Trustee: Rata Sade (aka Violet Sade)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
24 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Trust Proceeding (interim Application) / Interim Application for Suspension and Ancillary Orders
Outcome
Court refused to suspend the defendant trustee but made interim consent orders permitting limited operation of the Trust bank account by three trustees excluding the defendant and requiring delivery of accounting records; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Suspension of Trustee, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Interim Relief, Access to Trust Accounts, Delivery of Trust Records, Conflict of Interest
Trusts Equity Fiduciary Duties Civil Procedure Charitable Trusts Suspension of Trustee Breach of Fiduciary Duty Interim Relief +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip Marsh

Plaintiff Trustee

Romer Mahanga

Plaintiff Trustee

Arepa Patira

Plaintiff Trustee

Morris Gilbert

Plaintiff Trustee

Rata Sade (aka Violet Sade)

Defendant Trustee

Procedural Posture

Civil Trust Proceeding (interim Application) / Interim Application for Suspension and Ancillary Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a trustee should be suspended pending determination of alleged misconduct
  2. 2 Whether the disputed $30,000 payment constituted misconduct or breach of fiduciary duty
  3. 3 Whether the Trust account should be operable by trustees pending resolution

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined interim suspension because there was no real risk to trust assets given the requirement of multiple trustee signatures to operate funds, the imminent AGM providing beneficiary oversight, and the plausible innocent explanation for the payment; however, interim orders permitting operation of the bank account by three trustees (excluding the defendant) and requiring delivery of records were appropriate by consent.

Court Disposition

Court refused to suspend the defendant trustee but made interim consent orders permitting limited operation of the Trust bank account by three trustees excluding the defendant and requiring delivery of accounting records; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Pending further order of the Court the Trust's Westpac account may be operated by three trustees acting together, one of whom must be the treasurer, Arepa Patira; Rata Sade is not to be an account signatory.
  • Rata Sade is to deliver forthwith all accounting records relating to the Trust, including any cheque books, to Arepa Patira.