IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY
CIV-2015-419-000341 [2015] NZHC 2743
BETWEEN RODNEY ARTHUR NEEDHAM AND
DAVID STEWART LEE AS TRUSTEES OF THE BARBARA MCKEE FAMILY TRUST
Applicants
AND
BARBARA CATHERINE AGNES MCKEE
Respondent
Hearing: (On the papers) Counsel:
Jacqui Owen for the Applicants
No appearance by the RespondentJudgment:
6 November 2015
JUDGMENT OF MOORE J
This judgment was delivered by me on 6 November 2015 at 2:00pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.
Registrar/ Deputy Registrar
Date:
NEEDHAM & ANOR v MCKEE [2015] NZHC 2743 [6 November 2015]
[1] The applicants who are trustees of the Barbara McKee Family Trust (“the
Trust”) seek the following orders:
(a) leave to commence proceedings by way of an originating application under r 19.5 of the High Court Rules; and
(b) an order:
(i)dispensing with service of the originating application under rr 19.10 and 7.22 of the High Court Rules; or in the alternative
(ii)directions as to service of proceedings on an incapacitated person under r 4.40 of the High Court Rules and supporting affidavits.
[2] In the circumstances I am satisfied that leave should be given to commence the proceedings by way of originating application and accordingly I make orders to that effect in terms of r 19.5 of the High Court Rules.
[3] The substantive application seeks an order in terms of s 52(1)(b)(i) of the Trustee Act 1956 vesting certain land held by Barbara McKee as a trustee in the applicants as the continuing/retiring trustees of the Trust.
[4] The background is set out below.
[5] The respondent, Barbara McKee, and the applicants, Rodney Needham and
David Lee hold land at Tauranga and Pauanui Beach as trustees of the Trust.
[6] Barbara McKee has been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s dementia. In a medical certificate dated 17 June 2015 and exhibited to the affidavits, the certifying doctor reported that she suffers from severe dementia and a CT scan showed atrophy. The doctor observed that Barbara McKee is unable to make decisions regarding any of her financial or legal matters.
[7] As a result, she was removed as a trustee of the Trust and replaced by
Nancy Perrett by way of a deed dated 15 June 2015.
[8] Rodney Needham and David Lee now wish to retire as trustees of the Trust and transfer the land to the new trustees, Nancy Perrett and Suzanne McKee.
[9] Due to her incapacity Barbara McKee is unable to execute the necessary documentation to transfer her interest to Rodney Needham and David Lee.
[10] The difficulty which Rodney Needham and David Lee face is that due to the requirements of LINZ they are unable to transfer the land without vesting the interest in the land in the retiring/continuing trustees.
[11] It is for this reason they seek an order vesting the land in the names of themselves as retiring/continuing trustees.
[12] The present factual position is on all fours with the factual matrix which confronted Heath J in Kohn v Kohn.1 As was Heath J in Kohn, I can see no basis on which a substantive order should be refused and am prepared to deal with it on the papers.
[13] In the circumstances I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make the orders sought and, accordingly the following orders are made:
(a) an order dispensing service of the proceedings on the respondent due to her incapacity;
(b) the granting of a vesting order under s 52(1)(b)(i) of the Trustee Act
1956 vesting the land contained in the Certificates of Title SA41C/967 and SA64C/220 situated at 225A Ngatai Road, Tauranga and
16A Monarch Grove, Pauanui Beach in the applicants as the
continuing trustees.
[14] Leave is reserved to seek such further or other orders as may be necessary to
give effect to the judgment.
Moore J
Solicitors:
Allen Needham & Co Limited, Morrinsville
- AGLC
- Needham v McKee [2015] NZHC 2743
- Case
- [2015] NZHC 2743
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were whether leave should be granted to commence the proceedings by way of an originating application and whether the court should make an order dispensing with service of the proceedings on the respondent due to her incapacity, or provide directions for service of proceedings on an incapacitated person. The applicants argued that due to the respondent's incapacity, she was unable to execute the necessary documentation to transfer her interest in the land to them. The applicants also highlighted the requirements of Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) which necessitated vesting the interest in the land in the retiring/continuing trustees.
The court found that the factual circumstances were similar to those in Kohn v Kohn, where Heath J had granted the relief sought. Moore J was satisfied that there was no basis on which a substantive order should be refused and decided to deal with the matter on the papers. The court granted the orders sought, including dispensing with service of the proceedings on the respondent due to her incapacity and vesting the land in the applicants as the continuing trustees. Leave was reserved to seek further orders as necessary to give effect to the judgment.
The final orders made by the court included granting leave to commence proceedings by way of an originating application, dispensing with service of the proceedings on the respondent due to her incapacity, and vesting the land in the applicants as the continuing trustees.
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.