Six years after court-ordered removal as trustee of his family trust, Alex Mason’s attempt to take control of trust assets was dismissed in the High Court. His status as discretionary beneficiary in his own trust gave him no direct claim over trust assets.
It has been trying decade within the Mason family with patriarch Alexander, now aged 88, apparently unwilling to accept that creation of his family trust meant he no longer had absolute control over assets transferred to the trust.
In 2019, evidence of his hostile and abusive behaviour towards fellow trustees and his un-co-operative and dismissive attitude towards caregivers engaged to care for spouse Wendy suffering from dementia led the High Court to remove him as trustee.
The court was told Mr Mason set up two family trusts following a successful and profitable career as a building contractor: a 1997 trust holding two properties, one being the family home in Auckland suburb Pakuranga, and; a 2013 trust holding investment assets, primarily bank deposits then totalling some three million dollars.
Evidence was given that he decided to set up these family trusts following discussions with friends who had similarly set up family trusts.
He was later to claim in the High Court that he had been misled by professional advice stating he could shift assets in and out of these trusts as he pleased.
Family trust litigation in 2019 saw Mr Mason attempting to remove as fellow trustees his daughter Vicky and family accountant Paul Dodd.
Hostility ran so deep that court security was called to calm tempers during the hearing.
Justice Fitzgerald used Trust Act powers to remove Mr Mason as trustee, ruling his behaviour was so disruptive as to seriously and significantly impair trust operations.
Evidence was given of Mr Mason disputing medical advice about his spouse’s dementia, challenging plans put in place for her care and refusing to authorise trust payments for her ongoing support.
Mrs Mason was also one of the original trustees. She was removed as trustee by the court on grounds of her dementia.
Their daughter Vicki and Mr Dodd were left as the remaining trustees.
They have acted conscientiously as trustees, Justice Fitzgerald said.
A non-binding ‘memorandum of wishes,’ signed by Mr Mason at time the 2013 trust was set up requires Mr and Mrs Mason’s ‘comfort and welfare’ be the Trust’s primary obligations whilst the two are still alive, with trust assets to be split equally between their three children on their deaths.
Following the death of his spouse, Mr Mason laid claim to absolute ownership of the two properties transferred to the 1997 family trust: the Pakuranga family home where he lives, and a commercial property in Onehunga.
The High Court ordered removal of caveats he registered against title to the two properties; caveats intended to protect his claimed interest.
As trust assets, the two properties are held in name of the trustees. It is for the trustees, acting within terms of the trust, to deal with these assets.
Mr Mason has no direct claim to these assets, Associate Judge Cogswell ruled. As a discretionary beneficiary, any trust assets passing directly to him are at the discretion of the trustees.
In legal jargon, his potential right to full ownership of the two properties is a ‘mere expectancy,’ dependent on how the trustees exercise their discretion to distribute assets.
Triezenberg v. Mason – High Court (19.02.19) & Mason v. Triezenberg – High Court (20.03.25)
25.088