New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Part 19 high court rules

Legal area

Court

22 Nov 2019

HOLLIS & SOMERVILLE (Applicants) v FISHER PAINTERS (2017) LTD [2019] NZHC 3066

Citation

[2019] NZHC 3066
Court

High Court

Although a prima facie disqualification existed because partners' firm had provided services to secured creditors within two years, the Court found the risk to independence was remote given the services were unrelated to the company, the applicants' experience, the firm's capacity to manage conflicts, and creditor protection measures ordered; accordingly the Court exercised its s280 discretion to permit the applicants to act as liquidators subject to post-appointment notice to creditors and leave to apply to set aside the appointments.
25 Sept 2019

Baker v Baker [2019] NZHC 2426

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2426
Court

High Court

Because the respondent trustee suffers progressive dementia with an enduring power of attorney invoked and her incapacity prevents proper administration of the trust and sale of trust land, the Court exercises its inherent jurisdiction to remove her as trustee, grants leave to proceed under Part 19, dispenses with service and, under s52 Trustee Act 1956, makes a vesting order in favour of the continuing trustees.
26 Feb 2019

YHPJ TRUSTEES (2009) LIMITED & ORS v HOLWELL (GLANVILL TRUST) [2019] NZHC 265 [26 February 2019]

Citation

[2019] NZHC 265
Court

High Court

Medical evidence established the respondent lacked capacity and had been removed as trustee; there were no interested parties or disputed facts; accordingly it was expedient to make a vesting order under s 52(1)(h) Trustee Act 1956 and to permit commencement by Originating Application under Part 19 with service dispensed and determination on the papers.
13 Apr 2017

IN RE ASKEW [2017] NZHC 747

Citation

[2017] NZHC 747
Court

High Court

The application to remove the trustee was granted because the court, having required adequate medical evidence, was satisfied by a geriatrician’s certificate diagnosing severe dementia (most likely Alzheimer’s) that the trustee was under a disability warranting removal under s 43 of the Trustee Act 1956.
3 Feb 2017

ANDERSON v ANDERSON [2017] NZHC 73

Citation

[2017] NZHC 73
Court

High Court

Leave to proceed under Part 19 was granted because the application was administrative in nature and did not require pleadings or interlocutory steps; service on the respondent was dispensed with because medical evidence established severe cognitive impairment making service purposeless; service on beneficiaries was dispensed with because it would be unduly burdensome and the application merely regularised the trusteeship to meet LINZ requirements; accordingly the Court vested the specified property in the remaining trustees to enable the sale and administration of the trust.

New Zealand Case Law

HOLLIS & SOMERVILLE (Applicants) v FISHER PAINTERS (2017) LTD [2019] NZHC 3066

Baker v Baker [2019] NZHC 2426

YHPJ TRUSTEES (2009) LIMITED & ORS v HOLWELL (GLANVILL TRUST) [2019] NZHC 265 [26 February 2019]

IN RE ASKEW [2017] NZHC 747

ANDERSON v ANDERSON [2017] NZHC 73