J v J

[2019] NZHC 1674

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2019-404-001429

[2019] NZHC 1674

UNDER

the Property (Relationships) Act 1976

BETWEEN

MRS J
Applicant

AND

MR J

Respondent

Hearing:	17 July 2019
Counsel:	TH Brown and HZL Krebs for Applicant
Judgment:	17 July 2019

JUDGMENT OF DOWNS J

This judgment was delivered by me on Wednesday, 17 July 2019 at 4.45 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:
K3 Legal, Auckland.

MRS J v MR J [2019] NZHC 1674 [17 July 2019]

[1]    Judge T H Druce transferred this case to the High Court today due to its complexity. Whether it remains here is for another day.

[2]    Mr and Mrs J are husband and wife—but separated. Mrs J seeks without notice relief under s 43 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976. More particularly, Mrs J seeks orders restraining relationship property: gold bars worth millions of dollars and funds in bank accounts. Some of the property is here; some overseas.

[3]I heard from Mrs J’s lawyers (in person) this afternoon.

[4]    Section 7 of the Property (Relationships) Act applies to movable property in New Zealand and elsewhere, provided one of the  spouses  or  partners  lives  in  New Zealand (when the application is made). Mrs J lives in Auckland.

[5]Section 43 of the Act provides:

Dispositions may be restrained

(1)   Where it appears to the High Court or the District Court or the Family Court that any disposition of property is about to be made, whether for value or not, by or on behalf of or by direction of or in the interests of any person in order to defeat the claim or rights of any other person (party

B) under this Act, the Court may, … on such notice being given as the Court may direct, by order restrain the making of the disposition or may order any proceeds of the disposition to be paid into Court to be dealt with as the Court directs.

[6]    Mrs J has sworn two affidavits; one dated 2 July 2019, a second dated 11 July 2019. Recitation of detail is undesirable given the without notice nature of the application, and infancy of the case. The affidavits satisfy me the statutory criteria are met as a matter of inference. This because Mrs J’s evidence can establish:

(a)All of Mr J’s property is relationship property.

(b)Mr J has, for many years, placed relationship property into trusts or his own name.

(c)Mr J has been less than candid with Mrs J about relationship property, and other matters central to their relationship, including contact with their children.

(d)Mr J unilaterally changed the locks to a home or apartment, it being relationship property.

(e)Mr J has a false Belize passport.

(f)Mr J (and Mrs J) have lived in many different places.

(g)Mr J is seemingly anxious to maintain limited contact details, and lives in a gated compound in the United States of America.

(h)Gold bars can be moved. So too funds.

[7]    I make the restraining orders for these reasons, and because I am satisfied Mr J will not be prejudiced.1 The orders “freeze” the property but do not do more; they say nothing about Mr J’s substantive rights or obligations. Moreover, Mr J may apply to rescind the orders if he considers they ought not have been made, circumstances have changed, or both. I repeat the obvious: I have not heard from Mr J. He may have a complete answer.

[8]    Mrs J also seeks without notice discovery orders. I decline to make these. Jurisdiction remains in doubt. And, I would not have made the orders anyway. I am not persuaded they are necessary to preserve Mrs J’s position on a without notice basis.

[9]    Mrs J seeks an order for substituted service given Mr J lives in the United States (in, as observed, a gated compound). I make this order. It is desirable Mr J is promptly told of the orders and served with this judgment.

[10]   I have anonymised the parties out of an abundance of caution. Whether this should continue is also for another day.

1      I make separate restraining orders: one in relation to the gold bars; a second in relation to the funds in bank accounts. I do so because Mrs J said this would assist with service on interested parties.

[11]I place the case before the Duty Judge on Wednesday, 24 July 2019 at 10 am.

……………………………..

Downs J