IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE
CIV-2021-409-76
[2021] NZHC 1124
UNDER Section 112 of the Trusts Act 2019 IN THE MATTER
of ZURICH OAK TRUST
BETWEEN
CORRINA JOANNE HOOPER
Applicant
AND
TROY ADAM SURCH and DALE
ANTHONY WADSWORTH as trustees of the Zurich Oak Trust
Respondents
Hearing: (Determined on the papers) Counsel:
V A Nichols for the Applicant
Judgment:
19 May 2021
JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE LESTER
This judgment was delivered by me on 19 May 2021 at 3.00 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules
Registrar/Deputy Registrar 19 May 2021
HOOPER v SURCH [2021] NZHC 1124 [19 May 2021]
[1] The background to this judgment is contained in an earlier judgment of mine dated 19 March 2021, granting leave to the applicant, Ms Hooper, to commence this proceeding by way of an originating application.1
[2] Ms Hooper has now applied for an order for substituted service in relation to the one of the respondents, Troy Adam Surch.
[3] I am satisfied, having regard to the evidence of the process server instructed in Auckland, that reasonable efforts have been made to serve the proceedings on Mr Surch and cannot otherwise be promptly served.
[4] I am further satisfied that the following directions which I make represent the method of service likely to bring the documents to the attention of Mr Surch.
Orders
[5]I direct that:
(1)personal service of the covering letter from Saunders & Co dated 22 March 2021, originating application for removal of trustee dated 12 March 2021, affidavit of C J Hooper sworn 12 March 2021, Judgment of Associate Judge Lester dated 19 March 2021, and a copy of this Judgment along with the sealed order for substituted service (the Documents) is dispensed with;
(2)service on Mr Surch will be deemed to be effected upon the completion of the following steps:
(a)the documents are to be emailed to the address set out at para 2 of the affidavit of Ms Davison;
(b)the documents are to be posted to the address given at para 1.1 of the application for substituted service;
1 Re Hooper [2021] NZHC 576.
(c)the documents are also to be emailed to the email addresses referred to at para 5.3 of the affidavit of Ms Walters sworn 3 May 2021, with the subject line to be marked “Private and Confidential for the attention of Mr Troy Surch”; and
(3)the Documents will be treated as served three working days after the completion of the above steps.
[6] Costs are fixed on a 2B basis and are, with disbursements, to be costs in the cause.
Associate Judge Lester
Solicitors:
Saunders & Co, Christchurch
- AGLC
- Hooper v Surch [2021] NZHC 1124
- Case
- [2021] NZHC 1124
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court found that reasonable efforts had been made to serve the proceedings on Mr Surch and that the proposed method of service was likely to bring the documents to his attention. The court was satisfied that the method of service would be effective and that it represented the most appropriate means of serving the documents on Mr Surch. The court found that the applicant had satisfied the requirements for substituted service and that the proposed method of service was reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances.
Accordingly, the court granted the applicant's application for substituted service. The court directed that personal service of the documents would be dispensed with and that service would be deemed to be effected upon the completion of the specified steps. The court also fixed costs on a 2B basis and ordered that the costs, along with disbursements, would be costs in the cause.
In summary, the court granted the applicant's application for substituted service and directed that the documents would be served on Mr Surch by email and post. The court found that the proposed method of service was appropriate and likely to bring the documents to the attention of Mr Surch. The court also fixed costs on a 2B basis and ordered that the costs, along with disbursements, would be costs in the cause.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.