Having a family trust own business assets allows considerable dexterity in distribution of taxable profits, but has led to arguments between descendants of John Everiss, now aged 86, with grandson James challenging both prior distributions made by trustees and the manner in which commercial properties and heavy equipment owned by the Trust are now being distributed.
Everiss Family Trust had a net worth of some $7.1 million as at March 2023.
Just over half that is heavy equipment and machinery owned by Wellington-based Everiss Contractors Ltd and Everiss Civil Ltd, companies owned by the Trust.
Other Trust assets are primarily two commercial properties, plus receipts from property sales.
The High Court was told what was intended in late 2023 as an orderly distribution of Trust assets between two branches of the family has descended into huge family row.
Everiss Family Trust was set up in 1992. As was common at the time, all and sundry were named as beneficiaries: children and spouses of John and Barbara Everiss, plus grandchildren and their spouses, and greatgrandchildren.
A 2023 deed winding up the Trust intended an equal split between two branches of the family: the Everiss side represented by son Brent, who is now deceased, and the Long side by daughter Keryn.
It is not a division of cash. It is a distribution of assets.
The deed allocated to Brent’s son James a sixteen per cent share, valued at some $1.4 million. James’ complaint is that he received what he describes as a vacant gavel yard valued at about $900,000 and some ‘faulty equipment.’
Subsequent investigations initiated by James have queried a pattern of past distributions where James alleges grandfather John improperly received Trust benefits amounting to some $1.3 million, despite not being a beneficiary.
James sued for removal of the trustees, alleging breach of trust. He wants the High Court to review the manner in which Trust assets are distributed.
Ten weeks prior to a scheduled court hearing, the Long side of the family joined the fray; bringing a separate claim against both James and the trustees, claiming participation in the trial as interested parties.
James alleges this late claim is merely ‘a last minute attempt to create as much noise and confusion as possible.’
None of these disputed claims and counter-claims have yet to be heard.
Meanwhile, Justice Grau rescheduled the hearing date to 2026.
Both patriarch John and members of the Long family need more time to prepare, she ruled.
Everiss v. Long – High Court (14.05.25)
25.117