New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Stakeholder funds

Legal area

Court

1 Sept 2023

VERENA COLLEEN RYAN v STUART JAMES LOBB [2023] NZHC 2452

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2452
Court

High Court

The stay application was dismissed because WAG's position was adequately secured by the receiver's proposed withholding of specified sums from Mr Lobb's share; the Court lacked jurisdiction to withhold sums from Ms Ryan who was not subject to the relevant appealed orders; the Mortgage Discharge Order was released and the withheld stakeholder funds must be held until disposition of the appeal or further Court order.
7 Jun 2023

LI v GREEN LAND INVESTMENT LTD [2023] NZHC 1399

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1399
Court

High Court

The Court affirmed its liability findings and concluded the appropriate remedy is to regularise title and order specific performance of the plaintiffs' agreements against Green Land, require agreed trespass damages from identified plaintiffs, refuse to validate Zhong Xing's proposed contrary transactions, decline a charging order now, and direct procedural steps (single consolidated draft orders for sealing, timelines for responses, and procedures for stakeholder receipt and interlocutory claims to settlement funds).
2 Dec 2011

TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LIMITED V EDEN HOLDINGS 2010 LIMITED (IN LIQ) HC WANG CIV-2010-483-406

Citation

openlaw-b66283a0_072f_4d68_9122_9b14cf3a11c5.pdf
Court

High Court

The stakeholder fund was held on strict terms for the three named parties and a binding consent order required distribution to Malkev and Trustees Executors; because CBRE was not a party to that arrangement or order it has no automatic right to the stakeholder funds and must pursue any remedy by suing the recipients rather than preventing distribution.
28 Oct 2005

MINEHAN AND ANOR V COUNTRY ESTATES CANTERBURY LTD AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV 2005-409-000442

Citation

openlaw-46c0c2f9_f572_4280_a76f_c1c17a39b6fd.pdf
Court

High Court

Dawson Innes must distribute the funds it holds in accordance with clause 5.4 of the consent order and the expert report; potential characterization of some sums as relationship property does not permit non‑compliance with the clear terms of the consent order; where funds are insufficient they are to be distributed on an equal basis between the First Applicants and the Fitzgerald Family Estates Trust.

New Zealand Case Law

VERENA COLLEEN RYAN v STUART JAMES LOBB [2023] NZHC 2452

LI v GREEN LAND INVESTMENT LTD [2023] NZHC 1399

TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LIMITED V EDEN HOLDINGS 2010 LIMITED (IN LIQ) HC WANG CIV-2010-483-406

MINEHAN AND ANOR V COUNTRY ESTATES CANTERBURY LTD AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV 2005-409-000442