Minehan v McGuigan

Case [2020] NZHC 2393


IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND GREYMOUTH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA MĀWHERA ROHE

CIV-2019-418-000001

[2020] NZHC 2393

UNDER section 339 of the Property Law Act 2007

BETWEEN

DEA MARIE MINEHAN

First Plaintiff

JULIE MARIE MINEHAN
Second Plaintiff

AND

BEDE CHRISTOPHER McGUIGAN

First Defendant

KIERAN HUGH McGUIGAN

Second Defendant

On the Papers

Counsel:

D L Bell for the Plaintiffs

No appearance for the Defendants

Judgment:

14 September 2020


JUDGMENT OF DOOGUE J


This judgment was delivered by Justice Doogue on 14 September 2020 at 4.15 pm.

pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/ Deputy Registrar Date:

Solicitors:

Parry Field Lawyers, Christchurch

MINEHAN v McGUIGAN [2020] NZHC 2393 [14 September 2020]

[1]        On 14 July 2020, I granted the plaintiffs an order under s 399(1)(c) of the Property Law Act 2007, requiring them to purchase the first defendant’s interest in the relevant properties at a fair and reasonable price, and binding the defendant to give effect to the order by transferring his interests in the properties to the plaintiffs.1

[2]        In that judgment, I required that the plaintiffs obtain an updated valuation of the properties from a registered valuer for the purposes of calculating the purchase price.2

[3]        I am now in receipt of that valuation, dated 3 August 2020, which records the current value of the property as $1,650,000. After taking account of a Department of Conservation licence which is an asset of the Minehan Bros Partnership, and not subject to the present application, this means the property is valued at $1,600,000 for present purposes. I therefore confirm the purchase price for the first defendant’s one-quarter share of the property is $400,000 (less the costs and disbursements of

$30,855.25 referred to in my decision of 10 September 20203).


Doogue J


1      Minehan v McGuigan [2020] NZHC 1686.

2      At [68(b)].

3      Minehan v McGuigan [2020] NZHC 2361.

Details
AGLC
Minehan v McGuigan [2020] NZHC 2393
Case
[2020] NZHC 2393
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The plaintiffs, Dea Marie Minehan and Julie Marie Minehan, brought a case against the defendants, Bede Christopher McGuigan and Kieran Hugh McGuigan, seeking an order under section 399(1)(c) of the Property Law Act 2007 to compel the first defendant to sell his interest in certain properties to them at a fair and reasonable price. The case was heard and decided by Justice Doogue of the High Court of New Zealand at Greymouth. The plaintiffs sought to compel the first defendant to sell his one-quarter share of the properties at a fair and reasonable price, with the aim of determining the exact purchase price based on an updated valuation.

The legal issue before the court was the determination of the fair and reasonable price for the first defendant's one-quarter share in the properties, based on an updated valuation. The court had to consider the value of the property as assessed by a registered valuer, taking into account any relevant assets or liabilities associated with the properties. The court also needed to consider the costs and disbursements incurred in the proceedings, as previously determined.

Justice Doogue confirmed the purchase price for the first defendant's one-quarter share of the property, following the receipt of an updated valuation. The court found the current value of the property to be $1,650,000, and after considering a Department of Conservation licence, which was not subject to the present application, the property was valued at $1,600,000 for the purposes of this case. The court confirmed the purchase price for the first defendant’s one-quarter share of the property to be $400,000, less the costs and disbursements of $30,855.25, as previously determined.

The court's final order confirmed the purchase price for the first defendant's one-quarter share of the property, binding the first defendant to transfer his interests in the properties to the plaintiffs at the specified price.

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.