Body Corporate 207812 v Singh
[2018] NZHC 1449
•18 June 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE
CIV-2018-404-734
[2018] NZHC 1449
BETWEEN BODY CORPORATE 207812
Applicant
AND
PRITHI PAL SINGH AND GENDO SINGH
First Respondents
Continued on next page
Hearing: On the papers Counsel:
J Wood for Applicant
Judgment:
18 June 2018
JUDGMENT (NO 2) OF WHATA J
This judgment was delivered by me on 18 June 2018 at 11.00 am, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.
Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date: ………………………….
Solicitors: Rainey Law, Auckland
BODY CORPORATE 207812 v SINGH [2018] NZHC 1449 [18 June 2018]
AGNES BEATRIX GEE
Second Respondent
VERA TURNER
Third Respondent
PAUL SPENCER
Fourth Respondent
JACK MACNAY AND COLLEEN ROSEMARIE MACNAY
Fifth Respondents
ROBERT STEPHEN PETTY AND LINDA ELISABETH FINDLAY
Sixth Defendants
LYN KINGSNORTH AND ROY KINGSNORTH
Seventh Respondents
MURIEL MAY TURNER
Eighth Respondent
DOUGLAS GEOFFREY
BAMFORTH, ELIEEN BAMFORTH AND SCO TRUSTEES NO 1
LIMITED
Ninth Respondents
JANET KWAI YING NICHOLLS, MARK STEVEN NICHOLLS, TINA MARIE NICHOLLS AND VIV TAMA NICHOLLS
Tenth Respondents
DARIO EDUARDO MASUTTI, SHELLY ANNE GOODFELLOW
AND VULCAN TRUSTEE CO (2012) LIMITED
Eleventh Respondents
S.T.A.R.T. INVESTING IN PROPERTIES LIMITED Twelfth Respondent
TRACEY ANN LIPPARD
Thirteenth Respondent
JANET AMANDA FORBES
Fourteenth Respondent
ROSS WILLIAM NUNN
Fifteenth Respondent
HAIQING WANG
Sixteenth Respondent
ASHINTULLY LIMITED
Seventeenth Respondent
DOUGLAS THOMAS BICKLEY
Eighteenth Respondent
PETER BARRY KIVELL AND GC TRUSTEE SERVICE LIMITED
Nineteenth Respondent
STEPHEN JOHN WALLACE
Twentieth Respondent
BRENDON LESLIE HAWORTH AND ALISON MAY HAWORTH
Twenty First Respondents
MICHAEL JOHN McGOUGAN AND McGOUGAN TRUSTEE LIMITED
Twenty Second Respondents
THOMAS IAN CURTIS DONALD AND ROBERT ALLAN DONALD
Twenty Third Respondents
JOYCE MADELINE DAVIES AND LEWIS CALLANAN TRUSTEES LIMITED
Twenty Fourth Respondents
AK INVESTMENT PROPERTIES LIMITED
Twenty Fifth Respondent
STEPHEN JOHN WHEELER, AMANDA JANE WHEELER AND MICHAEL JAMES WHEELER
Twenty Sixth Respondents
DOREEN MAY WALKER
Twenty Seventh Respondent
KEITH REGINALD INGER AND BAVAGE CHAPMAN TRUSTEES LIMITED
Twenty Eighth Respondents
SANDRA KAY HILL AND SARA KATIE DEVENIE
Twenty Ninth Respondents
JAMES DEREK MARSHALL,
PENELOPE JANE MARSHALL AND JAMES DOMINIQUE MARSHALLThirtieth Respondents
BRONWEN McPHERSON AND NICOLE ANN DOMETT
Thirty First Respondents
DAVID ROBERTSON BENTHAM, ROBYN MARIE BENTHAM AND SUSAN MARY KINGSTON
Thirty Second Respondents
ANN LOIS MILNER BUSSE AND CHANTEL LOUISE WRIGHT
Thirty Third Respondents
ROY SWANNACK AND MYRTLE DORA SWANNACK (DECEASED)
Thirty Fourth Respondents
MAVIS LIMBRICK
Thirty Fifth Respondent
CAROLE ANN O’LEARY AND DANIEL MICHAEL O’LEARY
Thirty Sixth Respondents
HEATHER PATRICIA HOWARTH, CHARLES ANDREW HOWARTH, PATRICIA JILL HOWARTH AND HOWARTH FAMILY TRUSTEE
COMPANY LIMITED
Thirty Seventh Respondents
GJCEE LIMITED
Thirty Eighth Respondent
JANET ELIZABETH SCRYMGEOUR, MARGARET ANN SCRYMGEOUR AND HORROCKS HAMPTON TRUSTEE COMPANY LIMITED
Thirty Ninth Respondents
MAVIS PATRICIA KING
Fortieth Respondent
STEPHEN JOHN CROSS AND IRENE MARY CROSS
Forty First Respondents
JACQUELINE MICHELLE TOBIN AND SHARON JOANNE BYRNE
Forty Second Respondents
NAM KYU CHOI AND JEONG SOON CHOI
Forty Third Respondents
ROY TERENCE HARDING AND REBECCA JANE CARE
Forty Fourth Respondents
SEOK HEON LEE
Forty Fifth Respondent
ALICE JANE YOUNG, LINDA-JEAN YOUNG AND WEBB FARRY
LIMITED
Forty Sixth Respondents
EMERALD GREEN INVESTMENTS LIMITED
Forth Seventh Respondent
MICHAEL McHARDIE BERRY AND STEPHANIE ANNE BERRY
Forty Eighth Respondents
ALLEN BRIAN McCLYMONT AND EVANGELIA McCLYMONT
Forty Ninth Respondents
ROBERT EDWARD HAMER
Fiftieth Respondent
ROSEMARIE WINIFRED WALTERS
Fifty First Respondent
CORINNE FRANCES EDGAR AND PHILIP REGINALD ANDERSON
Fifty Second Respondents
PATRICIA’S LEGACY LIMITED
Fifty Third Respondent
COLIN JOHN TILLEY, PETRINA LEE TILLEY AND JOHN M VINCENT TRUSTEE CO LIMITED
Fifty Fourth Respondents
LUCILLE BRENDA BERLAND MELDRUM
Fifty Fifth Respondent
CLARENCE ROBERT YOUNG
Fifty Sixth Respondent
VANESSA ELIZABETH SKEEN
Fifty Seventh Respondent
DIVERS R US LIMITED
Fifty Eighth Respondent
DARIO MASUTTI AND COLLEEN JUDITH MASUTTI
Fifth Ninth Respondent
GWENOLYN PAYNE
Sixtieth Respondent
JOHN McGEOCH SWAN
Sixty First Respondent
BANK OF NEW ZEALAND
Sixty Second Respondent
WESTPAC NEW ZEALAND LIMITED
Sixty Third Respondent
ANZ NEW ZEALAND LIMITED
Sixty Fourth Respondent
GUY DENBY DOMETT
Sixty Fifth Respondent
THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION
Sixty Sixth Respondent
ASB BANK LIMITED
Sixty Seventh Respondent
KIWIBANK LIMITED
Sixty Eighth Respondent
MICHAEL EDWARD WALTERS, SHIRLEY ELIZABETH WALTERS, LINDA LOUISE RYAN, MICHAEL GRANT RYAN, CHRISTINE MAY COOMBRIDGE, BRENT ALAN
COOMBRIDGE
Sixth Ninth Respondent
VERO INSURANCE LIMITED
Seventieth Respondent
[1] In my judgment of 13 June 2018, I made orders approving the proposed scheme, subject to confirmation that the proposed scheme was the same scheme approved at the AGM on 27 March 2018.
[2] It transpires that there was an amendment made to that scheme. At the time of the AGM, cl 22 read:
The Body Corporate members jointly indemnify and hold harmless the Body Corporate Chair and the members of the Body Corporate Committee for all acts and omissions done in furtherance of this scheme except in case of wilful misconduct or gross negligence.
[3] Subsequent to the AGM, Mr Wood became aware, through preparing for another matter, that the clause used potentially would exclude cover under a Body Corporate’s Office Bearer’s insurance. He therefore added the following to the start of cl 22 in the present scheme:
To the extent that any policy of Office Bearer’s Insurance (or other such similar insurance, however named) taken out by the Body Corporate does not respond to a claim made against the Body Corporate Chair and/or Body Corporate Committee members …
[4] On 19 April, this scheme with this altered clause was filed and, on receiving an endorsed copy of the originating application, the scheme with the altered clause was served on all owners (and mortgagees and insurers). The scheme prepared for sealing is identical to the one that was served.
[5] Mr Wood has submitted that the effect of the alteration does not increase the burden of the indemnity on the owners. I agree. For that reason and because a copy of the scheme to be approved was served on all interested parties, I am content to approve the scheme in its present draft.
[6] However, notwithstanding this, I have issued this judgment for completeness and to formally record the basis upon which the scheme has been approved.
0
0
1