Mrs X v Company B

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF THE PARTIES AND OF THE ENTITITES ANONYMISED IN THE JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CIV-2013-409-001783 [2014] NZHC 2126

UNDER	the Land Transfer Act 1952
AND
UNDER	the Property (Relationships) Act 1976
BETWEEN	MRS X Applicant
AND	COMPANY A Respondent

Hearing:	18 and 21 July 2014
Appearances:	A M Corry for Applicant J E Bayley for Respondent
Judgment:	4 September 2014

JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE

on application as to non-lapsing of notice of claim

MRS X v COMPANY A [2014] NZHC 2126 [4 September 2014]

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................[1] The subject-matter of this proceeding – the Company A properties ......................[3] The notice of claim.................................................................................................[7] The other notice and the Company B land ...........................................................[10] The interest claimed in this case ..........................................................................[14] Ownership of the Company A properties .............................................................[19] Property 1  [21] Property 2       [25] Property 3  [27] Property 4       [29] The terms and funding of the Company A purchase ............................................[32] Ownership and control of Company A.................................................................[37] Caveat lapsing - the applicable principles............................................................[43]

Does Mr X have a reasonably arguable beneficial interest in any of the Company

A properties through a constructive trust? ...........................................................[44] The beneficial interest identified in the notice of claim and that pursued at the hearing       [44] The formulation of Mrs X’s constructive trust claim  [46] Comparing the interest claimed and Ms Corry’s formulation  [48]

The ingredients of a constructive trust – (1) contribution to the property in

question ................................................................................................................[56] The ingredients of a constructive trust – (2) reasonable expectation of an interest which Company A should reasonably expect to yield .........................................[60]

Mrs X’s evidence and Ms Corry’s submissions  [60] The absence of evidence of reasonable expectation   [70] Conclusion        [86] The “sham” argument...........................................................................................[91] The claim in the notice of claim   [91] Submissions for Mrs X   [92] Sham transactions – alter ego – the authorities   [95] Application of the authorities  [108] Conclusion       [111] Costs ................................................................................................................... [113] Orders ................................................................................................................. [115]

Introduction

[1]      Mrs X and Mr X were together for 25 years, marrying in 1990 and separating in April 2013.

[2]      By the efforts and skill of one or both (they disagree on which permutation) they arranged the purchase and holding of numerous properties.  They arranged the formation of numerous entities, mainly trusts but also companies, which acquired properties.

The subject-matter of this proceeding – the Company A properties

[3]      This proceeding concerns Mrs X’s notice of claim (pursuant to s 42 Property (Relationships) Act 1976 (PRA)) over four neighbouring [location redacted] properties (the Company A properties) being –

(a)      Property 1 [address redacted]. (b)      Property 2 [address redacted]. (c)      Property 3 [address redacted]. (d)      Property 4 [address redacted].

The current title for Property 4 brings together two properties which had been earlier dealt with under separate titles.

[4]      The respondent in this proceeding, Company A (Company A), is the legal owner of the Company A properties having purchased the land from four entities associated…