Ruocco v Ruocco - [2020] NZHC 1150

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA ROHE

CIV-2020-485-49

[2020] NZHC 1150

IN THE MATTER OF The Trustee Act 1956

IN THE MATTER OF

Proceedings under Part 18 of the High Court Rules 2016

BETWEEN

LUISA RUOCCO, ANTONELLA THERESE ASPELL, JOHN PAUL

RUOCCO AND JOHN CLAYTON MEO
Plaintiffs

AND

LUIGI GERARD RUOCCO

Defendant

Hearing: On the papers

Appearances:

C Matsis for the Plaintiffs

Judgment:

28 May 2020

JUDGMENT OF GRICE J

(Approval of variation of terms of trust)

[1] The plaintiffs have applied for certain orders arising out of the settlement of other High Court proceedings (CIV-2016-485-1004). In those proceedings the defendant (referred to as Bidgi in the affidavits and memoranda) claimed he was being deprived of his fair share of the S L and L Ruocco Family Trust, and sought distributions of his fair share.

[2] A settlement has been reached by the family members of those claims and it involves a distribution to Bidgi of what the parties agree to be an appropriate share.

LUISA RUOCCO, ANTONELLA THERESE ASPELL, JOHN PAUL RUOCCO AND JOHN CLAYTON MEO v LUIGI GERARD RUOCCO [2020] NZHC 1150 [28 May 2020]

[3] A deed of settlement dated 7 February 2020 recorded the terms of settlement which were in summary:

20.1The Trustees shall transfer to Bidgi a one-fifth share of the ITQ¹ held by the Family Trust.

20.2The Trustees shall effect a capital distribution to Bidgi of a one-fifth share of the net value of the remaining cash assets and liabilities of the Family Trust, after deduction of certain agreed amounts and expenses.

20.3Bidgi shall seek leave to discontinue the initial proceedings with no issue as to costs.

20.4Bidgi, his children, grandchildren and remoter issue are excluded as Interim Beneficiaries and Final Beneficiaries of the Family Trust and will have no further rights or entitlements under the Family Trust.

[4] To give effect to that settlement certain orders and directions are sought from the Court as follows:

(a)Orders under section 64A of the Trustee Act approving the variation of the Trust Deed such that the defendant, his children, grandchildren and remoter issue are excluded as Interim Beneficiaries and Final Beneficiaries of the family trust and will have no further rights or entitlements under the family trust.

(b)A direction under s 66 of the Trustee Act that the plaintiffs to make the transfers and distributions provided in the Deed of Settlement.

[5] The settlement was effectively reached between family members. These include the children of Luigi Ruocco who settled the trust, including Bidgi and Luisa Ruocco, the settlor’s widow and mother of the children. Two of the children (Antonella and John) together with Luisa Ruocco, and Mr Meo are the trustees.

[6] There are a number of discretionary beneficiaries including children under the age of 18 years. The beneficiaries are:

1 Individual Transferrable Quota in dry fish and wet fish.

Interim beneficiaries

· Each of the plaintiffs apart from John Clayton Meo.

· The…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Ruocco v Ruocco

Details

AGLC: Ruocco v Ruocco [2020] NZHC 1150
Case: [2020] NZHC 1150
Decision Date: 28 May 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand, Wellington Registry, heard a case involving a family trust dispute between the plaintiffs, Luisa Ruocco, Antonella Therese Aspell, John Paul Ruocco, and John Clayton Meo, and the defendant, Luigi Gerard Ruocco. The plaintiffs sought orders to approve a settlement of their disputes with the defendant, which included excluding him, his children, grandchildren, and remoter issue from being Interim Beneficiaries and Final Beneficiaries of the family trust. The settlement involved distributing to the defendant a one-fifth share of the net value of the remaining cash assets and liabilities of the family trust, and excluding him and his descendants from further rights or entitlements under the family trust. The parties reached a settlement and sought orders from the Court to give effect to that settlement.

The court was required to decide whether it should approve the variation of the trust deed and direct the plaintiffs to make the transfers and distributions provided in the deed of settlement. The court considered the interests of the beneficiaries and the benefits of resolving the dispute, including the stress and disruption caused to the family, the expense for the trust involved in legal fees for all parties, and the harm to the good name and reputation of the family in its close-knit community.

The court found that the interests of the beneficiaries of the settlements and the interests of the trust strongly favoured the granting of the approval and the directions sought. The court was satisfied that it was in the best interests of the beneficiaries to the trust to approve the variation and make the direction sought. Therefore, the court granted the orders and direction sought by the plaintiffs.

The final orders included approving the variation of the Trust Deed for the Family Trust such that the defendant, his children, grandchildren, and remoter issue are excluded as Interim Beneficiaries and Final Beneficiaries of the family trust and will have no further rights or entitlements under the family trust, and directing the plaintiffs to make the transfers and distributions provided in the Deed of Settlement.

Orders