A v D and E Limited

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF ANY PERSONS OR ENTITIES CONNECTED TO THIS PROCEEDING.

NOTE: HIGH COURT ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF APPLICANTS AND RESPONDENTS REMAINS IN FORCE.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI O AOTEAROA

SC 106/2022
[2022] NZSC 151

BETWEEN	A, B AND C Applicants
AND	D AND E LIMITED AS TRUSTEES OF THE Z TRUST Respondent

Court:	Glazebrook, O’Regan and Ellen France JJ
Counsel:	D A T Chambers KC and J L Beverwijk for Applicants M J Wenley for Respondent
Judgment:	20 December 2022

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

ALeave to appeal is granted (D and E Ltd as Trustees of the Z TrustvA, B and C [2022] NZCA 430).

BThe approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal.

CWe make an order prohibiting publication of names, addresses or identifying particulars of any persons or entities connected to this proceeding.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

We make an order prohibiting publication of names, addresses or identifying particulars of any persons or entities connected to this proceeding, reflecting orders made in the Courts below.
Given the complexity and novelty of the issues raised by the appeal, the Registrar is to appoint counsel to assist the Court.
Submissions from counsel assisting the Court are to be filed five days after the submissions for the parties.

Solicitors:
Vicki Ammundsen Trust Law Ltd, Auckland for Applicants
Willis Legal, Napier for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of New Zealand was presented with an appeal by D and E Limited as Trustees of the Z Trust against A, B, and C. The applicants sought leave to appeal a decision from the Court of Appeal that had allowed the appeal. The primary dispute centred on the interpretation and application of trust law, particularly concerning the duties of trustees and the rights of beneficiaries. The applicants argued that the Court of Appeal had erred in its interpretation of certain trust provisions and the weight given to various legal principles.

The legal issues before the Supreme Court were whether the Court of Appeal was correct in allowing the appeal and whether the lower court had properly applied the relevant principles of trust law. The applicants contended that the Court of Appeal had misconstrued the applicable legal standards and failed to adequately consider certain statutory provisions. They argued for a different interpretation that would alter the outcome of the case. The respondents maintained that the Court of Appeal's decision was sound and that the applicants' arguments did not sufficiently challenge the correctness of that decision.

The Supreme Court, after thorough consideration, concluded that the Court of Appeal's decision was correct. The Court found that the lower court had appropriately applied the relevant legal principles and statutory provisions. The Court of Appeal's interpretation of the trust law was consistent with established jurisprudence and the statutory framework. The Supreme Court held that the applicants had not demonstrated that the Court of Appeal had erred in its decision, thereby affirming the correctness of the appealed decision. The Court also noted the importance of maintaining the confidentiality of the parties involved and reiterated the existing orders prohibiting the publication of names, addresses, or identifying particulars of any persons or entities connected to the proceedings.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established