scholarly journals There is no Such Thing as a Sham Trust

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
BoHao (Steven) Li
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Bilateral Transaction ◽  
Appeal Decision ◽  
The Law ◽  
Trust Law ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
Law Commission

The Court of Appeal decision in Official Assignee v Wilson is the leading New Zealand case on "sham trusts". Obiter, O'Regan and Robertson JJ held that for a sham trust to exist, the settlor and trustee must have a common intention to not create a trust. Post-Wilson, debate continues over the precise elements that render a trust a sham. The Law Commission suggested that the sham doctrine, as a means of analysing the validity of an express trust, may not be the best approach. A better starting point would be a return to the certainty of intention requirement. In arguing that the Law Commission's recommendation is correct, this article will discuss three legal issues: whether an express trust is a unilateral or bilateral transaction; whether the excluded evidence has always been part of the objective intention requirement; and whether the legislative and policy factors have made foreign trust law distinct from New Zealand trust law. Finally, this article will expand on the test proposed by the Law Commission.

scholarly journals Should Pension Savings Be a Protected Property at Bankruptcy?

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 97
Author(s):  
Trish Keeper
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Business Innovation ◽  
Discussion Document ◽  
Appeal Decision ◽  
The Law ◽  
Court Of Appeal

In 2015, the New Zealand Court of Appeal held, in Trustee Executors Ltd v The Official Assignee,[1] a test case brought by the Official Assignee (OA), that the OA could not access the KiwiSaver balances of a bankrupt. In response, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment released a Discussion Document in July 2016, proposing a law change to make some, or all, of a bankrupt’s pension savings available to the OA for the benefit of a bankrupt’s creditors. This article outlines the Court of Appeal decision and its implications within the context of both the New Zealand Insolvency Act 2006 and the KiwiSaver Act 2006. It then critically discusses the law change proposed in the Discussion Document and suggests that, given the significant difficulties with this proposal, more limited reforms be implemented to prevent bankrupts unfairly using the inalienability of pension savings to defeat the interests of creditors. [1] [2015] NZCA 118.

scholarly journals Culpability, Kingston and the Law Commission

2010 ◽  
Vol 74 (5) ◽  
pp. 434-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cath Crosby
Keyword(s):  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Character Theory ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Pragmatic Approach ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Law ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
Do So

This article considers the basis upon which a person should be held to be criminally liable, and to do so, it is necessary to examine the leading theories of character and choice that underpin the State holding a person to be culpable of a criminal offence, i.e. the link between culpability and fault. The case of R v Kingston1 is used to examine the application of these leading theories and it is observed that choice theorists would not excuse such a defendant from criminal liability even though his capacity to make a choice to refrain from law breaking was made extremely difficult by external factors beyond his control. Only character theory could possibly offer exculpation in such circumstances on the basis that the defendant acted ‘out of character’ and his deed did not deserve the full censure and punishment of the criminal law. The Court of Appeal in R v Kingston would have been prepared to excuse, but the House of Lords, and most recently the Law Commission have adopted a pragmatic approach to the involuntarily intoxicated offender. This case serves as a reminder that while justice is the aim of the criminal justice system, it is not an absolute standard.

scholarly journals The Illusory Trust Doctrine: Formal or Substantive?

2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Mark Bennett
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Cook Islands ◽  
Trust Law ◽  
Court Of Appeal

"A document is put before us. Does it or does it not create a trust?" This article considers the illusory trust doctrine (ITD) and claims that although the ITD has been criticised as doctrinally unfounded and therefore based in substantive, non-legal reasons rather than pre-existing law, there are formal reasons of trusts law to support it. It begins by considering Atiyah and Summers' concepts of form and substance, and then examines how they apply in the context of equity (in general), and then trusts law (in particular). It then briefly considers a number of recent decisions on the ITD: the four cases constituting the Clayton v Clayton litigation in New Zealand, Pugachev and the Cook Islands Court of Appeal and Privy Council decisions in Webb v Webb. Finally, it analyses these ITD decisions using the form and substance distinction, concluding that it is arguable that the ITD is grounded in principles of established trust law, as opposed to purely substantive reasoning.

scholarly journals Women's Experiences of the Justice System

1997 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 649
Author(s):  
J Morris
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Women’S Experiences ◽  
Women's Experiences ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Law Commission

This article considers the impact of gender upon women's experiences of the New Zealand justice system, as lawyers and clients. As well as summarising study and survey material, it draws upon information provided to the Law Commission in the course of its project on Women's Acces to Justice: He Putanga mo nga Wahine ki te Tika. It concludes that women are still significantly disadvantaged by the justice system as a result of their gender and that there is an ongoing need for debate and consideration of these issues if women's access to justice is to be improved.

scholarly journals THE DOCTRINE OF BENEFIT AND BURDEN: REFORMING THE LAW OF COVENANTS AND THE NUMERUS CLAUSUS “PROBLEM”

2018 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-96
Author(s):  
Chris Bevan
Keyword(s):  
Indirect Method ◽  
Theoretical Issue ◽  
Recent Reform ◽  
Numerus Clausus ◽  
The Law ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
Reform Debate

AbstractThe doctrine of benefit and burden – an indirect method for enforcing the burden of positive freehold covenants – developed as an exception the strict Austerberry rule that the burden of positive covenants cannot bind successors directly at law. Three recent Court of Appeal cases (Davies v Jones; Wilkinson v Kerdene and Elwood v Goodman) confirm the continued existence and application of the doctrine but also reveal its deficiencies and limitations. This article explores the contemporary application of the doctrine, identifies its theoretical, historical and elemental frailty and, drawing on recent reform proposals of the Law Commission, highlights the case for reform. In so doing, this article argues that a vital theoretical issue has been overlooked in the reform debate: the numerus clausus principle.

The Licensee's Period of Grace: Bellotti Reconsidered

1996 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-240
Author(s):  
Tamara Kerbel
Keyword(s):  
Privy Council ◽  
Railway Company ◽  
Short Notice ◽  
Appeal Decision ◽  
The Law ◽  
Canadian Pacific Railway ◽  
Court Of Appeal

At present the law fails to provide an adequate balance between the interests of licensor and licensee when a licensor revokes a licence but gives an unreasonably short notice. The prevailing orthodoxy has followed the Court of Appeal decision in Minister of Health v. Bellotti. This article will argue that the consequences of this decision have proved disastrous for both licensors and licensees. In direct conflict with Bellotti is the Privy Council authority of Canadian Pacific Railway Company v. The King.

scholarly journals Judicial Specialisation in a Generalist Jurisdiction: Is Commercial Specialisation Within the High Court Justified?

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 307
Author(s):  
William Steel
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Future Research ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
The Way

In November 2013, after a series of Law Commission reports and years of academic, professional and judicial discussion, the Government introduced legislation to Parliament to replace the existing High Court commercial list with a specialist commercial panel. Whilst this panel would bring New Zealand into line with many comparable common law jurisdictions, this article argues that the case for specialisation has not been established. In particular, it notes that there is no publically available evidence to support the claim that the High Court is losing its commercial jurisdiction, or that commercial parties are choosing to resolve their disputes offshore or through alternative dispute resolution. Accordingly, this article argues that future research by the Law Commission, or other research agency, is required before specialisation can be justified. In reaching this conclusion, it also examines the issues that may arise if the Government decides to continue with its proposed reform under cl 18 of the Judicature Modernisation Bill 2013, suggesting changes along the way.

scholarly journals A Capital Opportunity: Creating a New Zealand Jurisprudence in Public and International Law

2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 703
Author(s):  
David Baragwanath
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
International Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Global Context ◽  
Law Faculty ◽  
Written Form ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Court Of Appeal

This is the written form of a lecture delivered at the Law Faculty on 28 April 2010 by Justice Baragwanath as part of a series of lectures delivered the various New Zealand law schools, to mark the judge's retirement from the New Zealand Court of Appeal.  In this lecture the judge argues for the creation of a New Zealand public law that both acknowledges the special nature of New Zealand society and recognises the global context within which all New Zealand law must now fit and to some extent must be judged.

scholarly journals Burgeoning Baigent?: A Critique of the Law commission's Analysis of Baigent's Case

1998 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 283
Author(s):  
Melanie Smith
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
State Enterprise ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The Law ◽  
State Enterprises ◽  
Law Commission

Who is responsible when a Crown entity or State enterprise breaches an individual's rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990?  Is the Crown or the breaching entity primarily liable, or both?  The Law Commission investigated this question in relation to liability arising out of Baigent's case.  In its report the Law Commission recommended significantly narrowing the Crown's liability to exclude State enterprises and Crown entities.  This article investigates the Law Commission's reasoning and recommendations.

The Present Law

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ashdown
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Present State ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Court Of Appeal

The starting point for any consideration of the Re Hastings-Bass rule must now be the Pitt v Holt and Futter v Futter litigation, which culminated in the 2013 decision of the Supreme Court in both cases. The judgment of Lord Walker is the leading exposition of the rule, and is likely to remain so for some time. However, it is not helpful to read Lord Walker’s judgment in isolation. At first instance both Pitt v Holt and Futter v Futter were decided on the basis of law which seemed then to be well settled and entirely orthodox. However, unlike in any of the Re Hastings-Bass rule cases which preceded them, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs played an active role in the proceedings, and after the taxpayer succeeded at first instance in each case, obtained permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The present state of the law owes its shape largely to the judgment in that court of Lloyd LJ, in the first appellate decision on the Re Hastings-Bass rule, which reformulated the rule so as to accord with important principles of English equity and trusts concerning the relationship between trustees and beneficiaries, and the supervision of the court.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document