29 June 2023

Relationship Property: Maule v. Cooper

 

Court orders were needed to enforce a relationship property agreement between Len Cooper and Tracey Maule following their 2018 divorce.  Len sought unsuccessfully to reopen their property agreement as unfair because of a subsequent $280,000 court judgment holding him liable for reckless trading.  

In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled Auckland builder Len Cooper was liable to pay damages for reckless trading with action taken following liquidation of his company Debut Homes Ltd.  In 2018, he had agreed a relationship property agreement with to a 50/50 split of personal and business assets having his half share then valued at $692,000.

Their relationship agreement has not been fully implemented while Len argues it should be set aside on grounds of serious injustice.  The Supreme Court damages ruling should also be taken into account, he claims.  Justice Peters ruled Len’s personal liability for $280,000 court-ordered damages was insufficient grounds to re-open the prior relationship agreement.  Presuming the damages claim is a relationship debt, she said, court proceedings were underway at time of agreement negotiations and Len accepted liability for any outcome in the Debut Homes litigation.

Justice Peters ordered both to perform their prior relationship property agreement.  This included an agreed cash adjustment by Len following the $1.64 million sale of their former family home on Mahoney Drive in Auckland suburb Albany.  He was also ordered to take legal steps to remove Tracey’s liability: on a mortgage over a Bush Road property, on her personal guarantees on supply contracts for Len’s business Jumbo Bins, and on a Jumbo Bins’ credit card used to pay business expenses.

In turn, Tracey was ordered to facilitate transfers of ownership for both Bush Road and Jumbo Bins from family trusts into Len’s name.

Maule v. Cooper – High Court (29.06.23)

23.103