IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE
CIV-2015-404-1043
[2019] NZHC 1046
BETWEEN VIRGINIA WOOLF
First Plaintiff
VIRGINIA WOOLF as Executor of the Estate of Noel Bernard Woolf
Second Plaintiff
AND
ALWYN BERNARD KAYE (previously known as ALWYN BERNARD WOOLF
First Defendant
MARK WILLIAM SYDNEY CLARK as
Executor of the Estate of Violet Isabel Woolf Second Defendant
Hearing: On the papers Appearances:
G A Keene for the Plaintiffs
A Gilchrist and C Fry for the Defendants
Judgment:
14 May 2019
JUDGMENT OF GORDON J
[Lifting of stay]
This judgment is delivered by me on Tuesday, 14 May 2019 at 10.00 am pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.
.....................................................
Registrar / Deputy Registrar
Solicitors: Foy Halse, Auckland
Richard Wood, Auckland
Counsel:G A Keene, Auckland A Gilchrist, Auckland
WOOLF v KAYE [2019] NZHC 1046 [14 May 2019]
[1] In my judgment dated 24 August 2018, reissued on 1 October 2018,1 I dismissed all of the claims made by the first plaintiff, Ms Woolf, against the first defendant, Mr Kaye, her brother. I gave judgment for Mr Kaye.
[2] Ms Woolf filed an appeal in the Court of Appeal against my judgment. On Ms Woolf’s application, I gave a decision dated 13 November 20182 staying the orders in my substantive judgment pending the appeal to the Court of Appeal.
[3] The parties have now filed a joint memorandum dated 6 May 2019 which records that the parties have settled all issues between them.
[4] By consent they seek orders lifting the stay ordered in my 13 November 2018 judgment. They wish to seal the orders in my 1 October 2018 judgment and the costs order I made in favour of Mr Kaye in my decision on costs dated 6 December 2018.3
[5] I therefore make an order by consent lifting the order for a stay made in my judgment of 13 November 2018. Again, by consent, Mr Kaye may proceed to seal the orders:
(a)as set out in [381] of my substantive judgment of 1 October 2018; and
(b)as set out in [102] of my costs decision of 6 December 2018.
Gordon J
1 Woolf v Kaye [2018] NZHC 2191.
- AGLC
- Woolf v Kaye [2019] NZHC 1046
- Case
- [2019] NZHC 1046
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court had to decide involved the interpretation of specific provisions in a will and the validity of a family arrangement deed. Virginia Woolf claimed that the family arrangement deed, which sought to distribute family assets, was invalid and that certain clauses in the will should be disregarded. Alwyn Kaye and Mark William Sydney Clark argued in defence that the family arrangement deed was valid and that the clauses in the will should be upheld. The court had to determine the validity of the family arrangement deed and the interpretation of the will's clauses.
In the judgment, the court found that the family arrangement deed was valid and that the clauses in the will should be upheld. The court dismissed all claims made by Virginia Woolf against Alwyn Kaye and Mark William Sydney Clark. The court subsequently stayed the orders pending an appeal by Virginia Woolf. However, after the parties reached a settlement, they jointly sought orders to lift the stay and seal the previous orders made by the court. The court granted the orders by consent, lifting the stay and sealing the previous orders.
The final orders made by the court were to lift the stay of the previous orders and seal the substantive judgment, the costs decision, and the family arrangement deed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.