New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Appointment of trustee

Legal area

Court

7 Dec 2023

AMANDA JULIE JONGENEEL v JACK ALLAN GEORGE SCHAAKE [2023] NZHC 3568

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3568
Court

High Court

Application dismissed because applicant failed to identify any substantive issue on which trustees were deadlocked; there is no evidence the trust has income or resources to fund maintenance or distributions; no concrete maintenance proposal or funding source was before the court; applicant conflated wider personal/property settlement issues with trustee decision-making, so removal or replacement under ss 112/114 was not necessary or desirable.
5 Dec 2023

KEA INVESTMENTS LTD v WIKELEY FAMILY TRUSTEE LTD (IN INTERIM LIQUIDATION) [2023] NZHC 3532

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3532
Court

High Court

Because the earlier judgment reserved leave and was obtained by formal proof under the High Court Rules, and because affidavit evidence demonstrated an imminent risk that the defendants (notably Mr Wikeley) would take steps (appointing replacement trustee or changing the proper law) that would frustrate the court's orders and prejudice the plaintiff, the court was justified in granting further interim orders without notice restraining those steps until 28 days after discharge of the specified default judgment; the orders are additional to and without prejudice to the sealed orders of 17 Novem…
13 Nov 2023

GAMBLE v SCHEPENS [2023] NZHC 3191

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3191
Court

High Court

Removal of both trustees was necessary and desirable because unilateral management, long‑standing failure to keep records, steady decline in farm condition and assets, and a substantial debt owed by trustee to the estates created a conflict of interest and risk to beneficiaries; appointment of independent professional trustee (Schepens Trustee Ltd) and ordering of reasonable remuneration payable from trust income were required to protect and restore estate assets.
22 Aug 2023

CORNES& ORS v HIRST & ANOR AS TRUSTEES OF THE BELLE STOREY TRUST [2023] NZHC 2293

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2293
Court

High Court

The Court was satisfied on the evidence and the parties' agreement that it was desirable to remove the existing trustees and appoint Comac Trustees Ltd; the statutory tests in ss112 and 114 Trusts Act 2019 were met, and s116 authorised vesting the specified trust property in the newly appointed trustee; costs were reserved for agreement or determination on the papers.
25 May 2023

INTHAYUNG v HEIMSATH ALEXANDER TRUSTEE LTD [2023] NZHC 1240

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1240
Court

High Court

Because the trustees did not oppose removal, there were genuine differences of view and a loss of trust and confidence affecting the proper administration and welfare of the beneficiaries (including minor children), it was desirable to remove the current trustees and appoint the proposed trustees; the appointment was made subject to a condition that the new trustees use reasonable endeavours to obtain releases from mortgage liability and to transfer the property by the specified date (22 June 2023).
5 Oct 2022

NADAN v SHARMA [2022] NZHC 2553

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2553
Court

High Court

Because the trustees (former spouses) were irreconcilably opposed, had reached an impasse and the trust was deadlocked under a deed requiring unanimous decisions, it was necessary and desirable under ss 112 and 114 Trusts Act 2019 to remove both trustees and appoint an independent corporate trustee; under s 116 their removal divested them of trust property which was vested in the appointed trustee; disgorgement was refused for lack of admissible evidence and left to the replacement trustee to determine.
28 Mar 2022

LEGLER, KLAUI and LEGLER v FORMANNOIJ [2022] NZHC 586

Citation

[2022] NZHC 586
Court

High Court

Downs J's 18 October 2021 interim order did not restrain use of the $1,000,000 term deposit because that distribution had been implemented before proceedings and the injunctions should not be expansively construed; however, balancing the status quo and least irremediable prejudice the Court allowed the first defendant to withdraw $500,000 from one term deposit to meet legal costs pending appeal, and dismissed the plaintiffs' interlocutory application for further restraint.
27 Aug 2021

NYHOFF v ATKINS [2021] NZHC 2238

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2238
Court

High Court

Leave to commence by originating application was declined for lack of justification; the Court removed Kiritea Atkins as trustee under s112 Trusts Act 2019 and appointed BGL Trustee 2012 Limited under s114 because the trusteeship required unanimity, an impasse existed that risked frustrating urgent resolution of a mortgage default and sale of the sole trust asset, and the proposed replacement ensured at least two trustees and proper administration; costs issue reserved.
22 Apr 2021

ALBERT ALLOO & SONS TRUSTEE COMPANY (2009) LIMITED v IRVINE [2021] NZHC 860 [22 April 2021]

Citation

[2021] NZHC 860
Court

High Court

Leave to commence by originating application was granted because the dispute (a trustee resignation conditioned on appointment of a replacement) is straightforward, unlikely to require discovery or interlocutory steps, and the originating application procedure better secures a just, speedy and inexpensive resolution; beneficiaries should be served and the Court will give directions as to service but will not direct service via the beneficiaries' solicitor without that solicitor's agreement.
1 Apr 2021

LEGLER, KLAUI, and LEGLER v FORMANNOIJ [2021] NZHC 737

Citation

[2021] NZHC 737
Court

High Court

Defendants' discovery application was dismissed because the documents sought were not relevant to the sole factual issue pleaded— the trustee's purpose at the time she appointed KTL—since the documents were not in the trustee's possession or control at that time and could only serve as after‑the‑fact justification; defendants' affirmative allegations did not alter relevance on the pleaded case.