Stokes v Insight Legal Trustee Company Limited

The appeal concerns a dispute between two families over a failed property sale. The appellants, trustees of the Stokes Family Trust, sought a declaration that the respondents, trustees of the RM Colebrook Family Trust, had consented to a property purchase. The High Court previously found the respondent Mrs Colebrook signed a property sale agreement with the intention of binding the RM Colebrook Family Trust. However, on the question of whether the co-trustee, Mrs Carr, consented, the High Court found against the appellants. The appellants appeal this finding. The respondents cross-appeal a decision that precluded them from advancing a new affirmative defence that the appellants failed to mitigate their loss. The appellants also appeal a decision declining to sustain a caveat over two properties owned by the RM Colebrook Family Trust. The Court found the appellants failed to discharge the burden of proof that Mrs Carr consented to the property acquisition. The Court found the appellants' reliance on various documents, including an application to New Zealand Home Bonds and draft statements, did not establish Mrs Carr consented. The Court also found the appellants' argument that Mrs Carr's evidence was inherently implausible was unpersuasive. The appeal was dismissed and the appellants ordered to pay costs on a standard appeal basis. The cross-appeal and appeal regarding the caveats were dismissed with no order as to costs.