Addleman v Lambie Trustee Limited - [2022] NZCA 231

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA545/2017
[2022] NZCA 231

BETWEEN	PRUDENCE ANNE ADDLEMAN Appellant
AND	LAMBIE TRUSTEE LIMITED Respondent

Court:	Cooper, Clifford and Gilbert JJ
Counsel:	A S Ross QC and R A Rose for Appellant D A T Chambers QC and J M McGuigan for Respondent V T M Bruton QC and N L Walker for Lambie Independent Trustee Ltd
Judgment: (On the papers)	8 June 2022 at 9 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The appellant’s application for an order adding Lambie Independent Trustee Ltd as a party to this appeal and for further directions is declined.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Gilbert J)

This judgment responds to an application by the appellant seeking an order joining Lambie Independent Trustee Ltd (LITL) as an additional party to this appeal and directions to secure compliance with final orders made by this Court in its substantive judgment delivered on 4 October 2019.[1] We do not consider it is appropriate for this Court to make these post-judgment orders. The appellant should pursue these outstanding issues in the High Court in the first instance.

Background

[1]Addleman v Lambie Trustee Ltd [2019] NZCA 480, (2019) 5 NZTR 29-016 [Substantive judgment].

The appellant, Mrs Addleman, is a beneficiary of the Lambie Trust (the Trust) which was settled by a Deed of Trust dated 19 March 1990. Lambie Trustee Ltd (LTL) was the sole trustee of the Trust from April 2006 until LITL was appointed a co-trustee on 27 October 2021.
From March 2003, after Mrs Addleman became aware of the existence of the Trust, she sought various trust documents from LTL. Her repeated requests were almost entirely resisted. Eventually, in June 2015, Mrs Addleman commenced proceedings in the High Court at Auckland against LTL seeking orders requiring disclosure. The High Court declined to order disclosure of any further trust documents for reasons given in a judgment delivered on 25 August 2017.[2]
[2]Addleman v Lambie Trustee Ltd [2017] NZHC 2054, (2017) 4 NZTR.27-016.
This Court allowed Mrs Addleman’s appeal on 4 October 2019.[3] The formal orders included:
[3]Substantive judgment, above n 1.
DWithin 30 working days of the date of this judgment [LTL] is to provide [Mrs Addleman] with all documents in its possession or power relating to [the Trust] in the following categories:
(i)financial statements;
(ii)minutes of meetings; and
(iii)any legal opinions and other advice obtained by the trustees and funded by the Trust.
ELeave is reserved to apply to the High Court for further direction in the case of any disagreement as to any redaction made in the documents provided in accordance with these orders.
FTo the extent any documents in these categories are no longer available, [LTL] is to serve on [Mrs Addleman] within the same 30‑day period an affidavit from a person having the relevant knowledge explaining what efforts have been made to locate the missing documents and what is thought to have become of them and…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Addleman v Lambie Trustee Limited and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2022] NZCA 231
Decision Date: 8 June 2022 at 9 am

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Prudence Anne Addleman has appealed against the orders of the Court of Appeal in Addleman v Lambie Trustee Limited. The original dispute involved Mrs Addleman seeking trust documents from the trustees of the Lambie Trust. After initially failing in the High Court, Mrs Addleman successfully appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Court ordered the trustees to disclose various documents and directed that any disputes over redactions were to be resolved in the High Court. The Court further ordered the trustees to pay Mrs Addleman's costs of appeal. The trustees applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, and a stay was granted pending the outcome of that appeal. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, but clarified that the orders for disclosure did not extend to certain legal advice. The appellant now seeks to add Lambie Independent Trustee Ltd as a party to this appeal and obtain further directions. The central legal issue was whether the Court of Appeal should grant the appellant's application to add a new party and give further directions, or whether the matter should be dealt with in the High Court. The Court held that the appeal had been concluded and the matter was res judicata. The Court found that neither the recall jurisdiction nor any other power under the Court of Appeal Rules assisted the appellant. The Court was not the appropriate forum to resolve the factual disputes concerning the trustees' compliance with the orders. The Court declined the appellant's application, holding that the proper course was for the appellant to pursue her complaints about the trustees' compliance in the High Court.

Orders