08 August 2024

Lien: Nigel Carruthers Aviation v. Skyline Aviation

 

Winton Land’s Chris Meehan sued to recover possession of his personal Beechjet 400, grounded after Skyline Aviation claimed a lien over the aircraft for unpaid bills.  Mr Meehan disputes the amount owed.

The High Court ruled a common law possessory lien otherwise entitling Skyline to keep possession of the aircraft until paid was overridden by terms of its agreement with Mr Meehan’s company: Nigel Carruthers Aviation Ltd.

In 2023, Winton’s CEO and board chair purchased a 25 year old personal jet.  The aircraft had been upgraded in 2012 with new engines and upgraded avionics.

Mr Meehan told the High Court he intended to use the aircraft for travel within New Zealand and to Australia, both for business and personal trips.  He used the aircraft on only two occasions before Skyline impounded it mid-2024 in a dispute over unpaid invoices.

A total of $622,000 is claimed; some for maintenance charges, the balance being monthly management fees.  Skyline had agreed to co-ordinate short-term private charters at times when the aircraft was not required by Mr Meehan.

Any person who has done work on a chattel, such as a motor vehicle or aircraft, is entitled to retain possession until paid.  This common law possessory lien is described as a ‘self-help’ remedy; there is no need for prior agreement or court order.

This right to retain possession is used by contractors to get payment for work done or improvements made to a chattel.  It cannot be used to force payment of arrears in management fees.

Skyline claimed it held a possessory lien for some $288,000 invoiced for repairs and maintenance of the Beechjet.  It was not claiming a lien for the balance, being unpaid management fees.

Mr Meehan disputed the amount due, criticising Skyline’s timeliness and standard of work.

Justice Radich ordered Skyline release the aircraft.

The contract with Mr Meehan’s company states Skyline has ‘no interest in or right to the aircraft other than rights expressly set out in this agreement.’

To state that the contract sets out in full their relationship implies that Skyline’s right to a common law possessory lien is lost, Justice Radich ruled.

Nigel Carruthers Aviation Ltd v. Skyline Aviation Ltd – High Court (8.08.24)

24.187