IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE
CIV-2023-409-324
[2023] NZHC 2177
UNDER Part 19 of the High Court Rules 2016 and
ss 316 and 317 of the Property Law Act 2007
IN THE MATTER OF
an application to vary a covenant
BETWEEN
TRUDY HELEN WILLIAMSON and
EMMA HELEN HEWSON as trustees of T E C TRUST
First Applicants
WARNORBILL LIMITED
Second ApplicantAND
SIMON JOHN PHILLIPS and LISA ANN PHILLIPS
First Respondents
GRAEME DESMOND RILEY
Second RespondentJESSICA STANDFIELD and DYLAN JAMES POPE
Third Respondents
GERARD DOMINIC O’REILLY and JANE EMILY O’REILLY
Fourth Respondents
JAMES STEWART PARKINSON and RENNAE DENISE TAYLOR
Fifth Respondents
SHARON ELIZABETH INCH and KELVIN GREGORY INCH
Sixth Respondents
GRAHAM WILLIAM TODD and EMMA KATE TODD
Seventh Respondents
WILLIAMSON v PHILLIPS [2023] NZHC 2177 [14 August 2023]
HAMISH ALISTAIR MCLEAN and WENDY LOUISE MCLEAN
Eighth Respondents
Hearing: 14 August 2023 Counsel:
J A Higby and G L S Lawson for Applicants No appearance for Respondents
Judgment:
14 August 2023
ORAL JUDGMENT OF CHURCHMAN J
[1] These proceedings were commenced originally seeking permission for the filing of an originating application. That matter was determined by Associate Judge Paulsen on 3 July 2023. He made a number of orders in relation to granting leave and to service.
[2] I am advised from the Bar that all parties directed to be served have been served. The Ashburton District Council has consented to the orders sought. Of the eight respondents, seven have formally either signed documents agreeing to the variation sought or, in one case, consented to it but not filed a document. One set of defendants, the first defendants, Mr and Mrs Phillips, have not responded at all. I am advised from the Bar that it is understood they do not wish to be involved in the proceedings, they neither oppose it nor consent to the orders sought.
[3] Having heard counsel, I am satisfied that the orders sought in the draft presented to me this morning are appropriate, and I make orders in accordance with the terms of that draft document.
Churchman J
Solicitors:
Tavendale and Partners, Christchurch for Applicants
- AGLC
- Williamson v Phillips [2023] NZHC 2177
- Case
- [2023] NZHC 2177
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to decide whether the proposed variation of the covenant was justified and appropriate. This involved assessing the impact of the variation on the property and the rights of the respondents, as well as determining whether the applicants had fulfilled the necessary legal requirements to seek such a variation.
In delivering the judgment, Churchman J noted that all required parties had been served and that the Ashburton District Council had consented to the variation. Seven of the eight respondents either agreed to the variation or had not opposed it. The court found that the orders sought were appropriate, and subsequently made orders in line with the draft presented. The specific terms of these orders were not detailed in the excerpt but would likely pertain to the modification of the covenant as sought by the applicants.
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.