PB v BJB

[2014] NZHC 3165

NOTE: PURSUANT TO S 35A OF THE PROPERTY (RELATIONSHIPS) ACT 1976, ANY REPORT OF THIS PROCEEDING MUST COMPLY WITH SS 11B TO 11D OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT 1980.  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE SEE COURT/LEGISLATION/RESTRICTIONS-ON-PUBLICATIONS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2014-404-000736
CIV-2014-404-001148

CIV-2014-404-001294 [2014] NZHC 3165

BETWEEN

PB

Appellant

AND

BJB Respondent

Hearing:	3 September 2014
Appearances:	Appellant in Person Lady Deborah Chambers QC and Peter McCutcheon for the Respondent
Date ofJudgment:	11 December 2014

RESERVED JUDGMENT OF MOORE J

This judgment was delivered by  on 11 December 2014 at 11:00am pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/ Deputy Registrar

Date:

PB v BJB [2014] NZHC 3165 [11 December 2014]

Contents

Paragraph

Number

A.    INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................[1] B.     THE APPEALS ............................................................................................[12] First appeal (Oral judgment – 3 March 2014)..............................................[13] Second appeal (Minute – 16 April 2014) .....................................................[21] Third appeal (Reserved decision – 23 May 2014) .......................................[24] Exchange rates .............................................................................................[26]

C. APPROACH ON APPEAL..........................................................................[29] D. FIRST APPEAL (ORAL JUDGMENT – 3 MARCH 2014)........................[33] Unfeasibility .................................................................................................[35] Trans-Tasman Proceedings Act 2010 ...........................................................[42] Gilbert J’s decision .......................................................................................[45] Contempt of Court .......................................................................................[51]

E.     SECOND APPEAL (MINUTE – 16 APRIL 2014)......................................[64] F.     THIRD APPEAL (RESERVED DECISION – 23 MAY 2014) ...................[69] Sale of the family home ...............................................................................[73] Maintenance order........................................................................................[85] Jurisdiction .......................................................................................[86]

Quantum ...........................................................................................[92] Duration..........................................................................................[102] Repugnant to justice .......................................................................[107] Unilateral deduction .......................................................................[109] Transfer of funds ........................................................................................ [114]

G.    RESULT .....................................................................................................[123]

A.      INTRODUCTION

[1]      Mr B, the applicant married Mrs B in 1990.  They separated 20 years later. Their marriage was dissolved on 29 June 2011.

[2]      When they married, Mrs B was aged 25 and Mr B 47, an age difference of 22 years.  At the time they were married Mr B was an independently wealthy retired German lawyer.   Mrs B was an intermediate school teacher.   Immediately after marriage Mrs B ceased work, focusing her energies on the home.

[3]      The couple enjoyed the benefits of wealth, living together in an expensive home on Remuera Road, cruising around New Zealand and beyond aboard their 55 foot yacht and travelling extensively internationally.  The couple had two children, now aged 20 and 22 respectively.  One is a university student living with Mrs B in a rented flat. The other lives with Mr B in the former matrimonial home.

[4]      At the beginning of the marriage Mr B had considerable wealth in three Lichtenstein companies.  In 2007 two of the companies were liquidated so all assets are now held by the parties directly.   The third company has no value.   Neither worked in outside employment during their marriage.  They lived off the proceeds and income of capital.  They worked on developing their Remuera home and their properties in Germany.  Mrs B received two inheritances totalling $330,000 which was applied to the relationship.

[5]      Since their separation the parties have been locked in a vitriolic and sustained dispute over the relationship property. Mrs  B claims that the total value of the relationship estate is in the order of $9.5 million and includes:

(a)       the  former  family…