New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Indemnity from trust fund

Legal area

Court

30 Sept 2020

LYNX TRUSTEES LIMITED (in liq) v MEMELINK [2020] NZHC 2401

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2401
Court

High Court

By consent and on the uncontested materials the Court entered summary judgment for the plaintiff that it is entitled to indemnity from the trust fund for the specified trust debts and for liquidator remuneration and expenses, awarded judgment for the stated sum and interest, declared the trust fund charged, vested specified properties in named trustees, granted leave to seek further remuneration, and adjourned the contested items for hearing.
24 Mar 2017

SIMPSON v SAX [2017] NZHC 544

Citation

[2017] NZHC 544
Court

High Court

The Beddoe application was brought in good faith and raised reasonably arguable positions but was unsuccessful; given both trustees had a measure of success and absence of respondent submissions, the appropriate outcome on costs is that they lie where they fall.
6 Dec 2013

THURSTON v THURSTON [2013] NZHC 3250

Citation

[2013] NZHC 3250
Court

High Court

Plaintiff entitled to costs for trustee removal; indemnity and uplift against defendants refused because their conduct did not justify increased costs but trustees are not entitled to indemnity from the trust fund under s38(2) or cl 8.2 where liability stems from conduct amounting to dishonesty or a wilful breach as assessed by the Spencer test; accordingly defendants must pay plaintiff costs equivalent to 2B share while the trust fund bears the remainder of plaintiff's costs and disbursements.
21 Apr 2009

WALKER AND ORS V COLLINS AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV-2007-409-002209

Citation

openlaw-365e0b59_6ecf_4555_a1ce_48de8f304742.pdf
Court

High Court

The court awarded costs on the 2B scale because the affidavits and conduct were not sufficiently exceptional to warrant 2C under Rule 14.2(e); refused certification for second counsel following established precedent; declined to reduce the award for an unsuccessful secondary personal‑liability argument because it occupied little hearing time and was relevant to substantive issues; and ordered costs paid from the general trust fund because trustees acted reasonably given defective documentation.

New Zealand Case Law

LYNX TRUSTEES LIMITED (in liq) v MEMELINK [2020] NZHC 2401

SIMPSON v SAX [2017] NZHC 544

THURSTON v THURSTON [2013] NZHC 3250

WALKER AND ORS V COLLINS AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV-2007-409-002209