IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NEW PLYMOUTH REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA NGĀMOTU ROHE
CIV-2013-443-058 [2018] NZHC 155
UNDER the Family Protection Act 1955 IN THE MATTER
of the estate of KENNETH JOHN PARDINGTON (deceased)
BETWEEN
ERIN MAUREEN KINNEY Plaintiff
AND
MYRTLE MARGARET PARDINGTON, DAVID JOHN PARDINGTON AND KENNETH MARK PARDINGTON Defendants
AND
MYRTLE MARGARET PARDINGTON, DAVID JOHN PARDINGTON AND KENNETH MARK PARDINGTON Interested Parties
CIV-2017-443-73
BETWEEN ERIN MAUREEN KINNEY Plaintiff
ANDROYCE WILLIAM WOOD as Trustee of the KJ PARDINGTON FAMILY TRUST First Respondent
DAVID JOHN PARDINGTON as Trustee
of the KJ PARDINGTON FAMILY TRUST Second Respondent
KENNETH MARK PARDINGTON as Trustee of the KJ PARDINGTON FAMILY TRUST
Third Respondent
WAYNE FRANCIS McCURDY as Trustee of the KJ PARDINGTON FAMILY TRUST Fourth Respondent
KINNEY v PARDINGTON [2018] NZHC 155 [15 February 2018]
Hearing: 5 February 2018 Appearances:
C T Gudsell QC and D E G Nielsen for Plaintiff in FPA
proceedings and Trust proceedings
K A McKenzie for Defendants in FPA proceedings
S W Hughes QC for Interested Parties in FPA proceedings
D Matheson for second, third and fourth respondentsJudgment:
15 February 2018
JUDGMENT OF CULL J
[1] This decision concerns a consolidation application, seeking to consolidate Family Protection Act 1955 (FPA) proceedings, which were substantively heard in August 2016, with Trust proceedings recently filed on 10 October 2017. The plaintiff applies for consolidation of both proceedings because there are common questions of fact and/or law arising in both proceedings, relating to the historic administration of the K J Pardington Family Trust (the Trust) and the Estate of K J Pardington (the Estate). In the alternative, the plaintiff seeks particular discovery before the FPA proceeding is determined.1
[2] The FPA proceedings were adjourned on 16 August 2016 part-heard, to determine the quantum of the estate. At issue are the liabilities of the estate to the Trust, including a Deed of Assignment dated 20 December 2013, which was entered into 10 months after the date of commencement of these proceedings on 8 February
2013. In my minute of 16 August 2016 I recorded that with the Estate’s total indebtedness of $526,474.49, the Court required clarification of the appropriate deduction from the value of the Estate assets.2
Factual background
[3] Since the adjournment of the proceedings on 16 August 2016, the parties have filed numerous memoranda and evidence in response to my minute of 16 August 2016.
1 The details of the discovery sought are dealt with under the heading “Particular discovery” later in this judgment.
2 Minute of Cull J, 16 August 2016.
Over this time, certain trust documents have been provided, following requests by the plaintiff for source documentation of the trust account material made available to date.3
Trust proceedings
[4] On 10 October 2017, during the course of the exchanges of documents and memoranda, the plaintiff issued Trust proceedings against the trustees of the K J Pardington Family Trust, comprising Kenneth and David Pardington together with two independent trustees. The independent trustees are not…
Continue reading Kinney v Pardington
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Kinney v Pardington [2018] NZHC 155
- Case
- [2018] NZHC 155
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
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.