Thaller v Trotter - [2016] NZHC 1508

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2015-404-179 [2016] NZHC 1508

BETWEEN
EWALD THALLER

Plaintiff

AND

STEPHEN DAVID TROTTER AS TRUSTEE OF THE STEPHEN TROTTER TRUST

Defendant

CIV-2015-404-444

BETWEEN EWALD THALLER Applicant

ANDSTEPHEN DAVID TROTTER First Respondent

STEPHEN DAVID TROTTER AS TRUSTEE OF THE STEPHEN TROTTER TRUST
Second Respondent

Hearing: 23 - 26 November 2015

Appearances:

G A Ireland for Plaintiff/Applicant
J H Hunter and V M Young for Defendant/Respondents

Judgment:

4 July 2016

JUDGMENT OF PETERS J

This judgment was delivered by Justice Peters on 4 July 2016 at 2.15 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar
Date: ...................................

THALLER v TROTTER [2016] NZHC 1508 [4 July 2016]

[1] This judgment determines disputes between the Plaintiff, Mr Thaller, and the

Defendant, Mr Trotter, as to the extent and division of their relationship property.

[2] The principal matters in dispute are:

(a)
Whether each party is entitled to share equally in all or just some of

the assets of a farming   partnership they   established in 1996

(“partnership”).     The asset in dispute under this heading is a

residential property in Auckland of which Mr Trotter is and always

has been the registered proprietor (“Epsom property”);

(b)

Whether Mr Thaller has an interest in “Oakdale”, a 535 acre farm in

Northland. Mr Trotter is the registered proprietor of Oakdale in his

capacity as trustee of the Stephen Trotter Trust (“trust”). Mr Thaller

contends that he is entitled to a half share in the property;

(c)

The extent, if any, to which a debt the trust owes Mr Trotter is

relationship property;

(d)

Whether    any    adjustments     are     required    for     post-separation

contributions or whether there are extraordinary circumstances

making equal sharing repugnant to justice; and

(e)

Whether Mr Trotter should be removed as trustee of the trust and one or more others appointed in his place.1

[3]

Mr

Thaller’s main proceeding is brought pursuant to the Property

(Relationships) Act 1976 (“Act”). In the other proceeding, Mr Thaller claims against Mr Trotter as trustee and, in particular, seeks a declaration that Mr Trotter holds Oakdale as constructive trustee to the extent of a one half share for Mr Thaller.
Mr Thaller also seeks to remove Mr Trotter as trustee.

1 Trustee Act 1956, s 51 and the inherent jurisdiction of the Court.

Background

[4] The parties commenced a de facto relationship in early November 1993, living together until they separated 20 years later, in April 2013. They met in London, where Mr Thaller, who is from Germany, was studying and Mr Trotter working. Mr Thaller was 26 at the time and Mr Trotter 35. They relocated, or in Mr Trotter’s case returned, to Auckland in 1994.

[5] Mr Thaller was employed in New Zealand on a part time basis from October

1995. Mr Trotter is a qualified accountant and was in full time employment from early 1995.

[6] Mr Thaller had no assets at the time the relationship commenced. In fact, he had a (student) debt. Mr Trotter,…

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 Thaller v Trotter

Details

AGLC: Thaller v Trotter [2016] NZHC 1508
Case: [2016] NZHC 1508
Decision Date: 4 July 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Thaller v Trotter, the High Court of New Zealand considered the division of relationship property between Ewald Thaller and Stephen Trotter. The court determined that the parties should share equally in the assets of their farming partnership, including the Epsom property. The court found that the property ceased to be the family home when the parties moved to Oakdale, but it was still considered relationship property due to its inclusion in the partnership. The court also ruled that Mr. Thaller was entitled to a half-share in Oakdale, as Mr. Trotter had nominated the trustees to purchase the property in order to defeat Mr. Thaller's claim under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976. The court declined to make an order for unequal sharing of property, finding that the contributions of both parties were largely commensurate. Finally, the court ordered the appointment of new trustees in place of Mr. Trotter, due to his inconsistent actions and inability to act impartially.

Orders