Ryan v Lobb - [2023] NZHC 3595

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2019-404-001591

[2023] NZHC 3595

BETWEEN
VERENA COLLEEN RYAN

First Plaintiff

DIGBY JOHN NOYCE
Second Plaintiff

AND

STUART JAMES LOBB

First Defendant

LOCKHART TRUSTEE SERVICES NO. 56 LIMITED
Second Defendant

WAG TRUSTEES (2020) LIMITED

Third Defendant

Hearing: 11 October 2023

Appearances:

No appearance by or on behalf of the First Plaintiff H Thompson for Second Plaintiff

R Latton for First Defendant
No appearance by or on behalf of the Second Defendant

Judgment:

8 December 2023

JUDGMENT (NO.2) OF POWELL J

[Application that First Defendant is in contempt of court]

This judgment was delivered by me on 8 December 2023 at 4.30 pm pursuant to
r 11.5 of the High Court Rules

…………………..
Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors/Counsel:
Patterson Hopkins, Auckland
McMahon Butterworth Thompson, Auckland

VERENA COLLEEN RYAN v STUART JAMES LOBB [2023] NZHC 3595 [8 December 2023]

[1] The second plaintiff, Digby Noyce, is the court-appointed receiver of the Lothbury Trust (“the Trust”). In that capacity Mr Noyce has sought the following orders:

(a)A declaration that the behaviour of the first defendant, Stuart Lobb, in interfering with Mr Noyce’s conduct of the receivership of the Lothbury Trust, amounts to contempt of court.

(b)Imposing a penalty of three months’ imprisonment on Mr Lobb, or alternatively such penalty as the Court thinks fit.

[2] In addition, Mr Noyce sought the power to execute all documents and take all steps necessary to transfer the primary asset of the Trust, a property located at 23 Orakei Road, Auckland (“the Orakei Road property”), from the registered proprietors, being the first plaintiff Verena Ryan, Mr Lobb and the second defendant Lockhart Trustee Services No. 56 Ltd (“Lockhart”) to a purchaser of the property upon settlement of Mr Noyce’s intended sale of the property, as receiver. There was no issue with that order as sought. An order is made as sought with leave to apply should further orders be required to effect the sale of the Orakei Road property.

Background

[3] The Trust is a family trust, settled by Ms Ryan and Mr Lobb in June 2005. Ms Ryan and Mr Lobb were married at the time. As well as the Orakei Road property the Trust also held antique furniture, jewellery, and watches.

[4] Since Ms Ryan and Mr Lobb separated in October 2016, they have been in dispute on a wide range of matters including the management and interpretation of the Trust. At the time Ms Ryan and Mr Lobb separated they were, together with Lockhart, the trustees of the trust. From the time of their separation the Trust was deadlocked. This was only eventually resolved through the removal of all three existing trustees and their replacement by Mr Noyce.1 Specifically Mr Noyce was appointed for the primary purpose of preserving the assets of the Trust pending the substantive outcome

1 See Lockhart Trustee Services No 56 Ltd v Ryan (as Trustee of Lothbury Trust) [2020] NZHC 1823.

of 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 Ryan v Lobb

Details

AGLC: Ryan v Lobb [2023] NZHC 3595
Case: [2023] NZHC 3595
Decision Date: 8 December 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Verena Colleen Ryan and Digby John Noyce, the court-appointed receiver of the Lothbury Trust, sought orders against Stuart James Lobb and others. They sought a declaration that Lobb's actions in interfering with the receivership amounted to contempt of court and requested a penalty, including imprisonment. The court had to decide if Lobb's conduct, including his refusal to vacate a property and his emails to real estate agents, constituted contempt of court under the common law. The court concluded that Lobb's emails to real estate agents, which attempted to obstruct the sale of the Orakei Road property, were a clear contempt of court. However, the court found that Lobb's other actions, while inappropriate, did not amount to contempt. The court ordered Lobb to pay the reasonable costs of the application and granted leave to the receiver to seek further orders if necessary to prevent interference with the sale process of the Orakei Road property.

The court granted the receiver the power to execute documents and take steps necessary to transfer the Orakei Road property to a purchaser upon settlement of the intended sale. The court emphasized the importance of carrying out the orders of the court without interference and the need to respect the court-appointed receiver's role in managing the trust assets.

Orders