With the equal division regime for relationship property not applying to relationships of short duration, disgraced businessman Tim Boyd was in court arguing extent of his financial contributions to a de facto relationship of a little over twenty months. A Family Court judge ruled Boyd forged documents and lied in court.
His de facto relationship with Samantha Powell lasted longer than his subsequent six months stint as chief executive of council-controlled Christchurch City Holdings. He resigned from City Holdings after allegations he lied about his work history.
In the Family Court, Judge Doyle directed that Mr Boyd’s relationship property evidence be forwarded for criminal investigation by both the police and the Law Society.
In addition, Judge Doyle criticised Mr Boyd for approaching Ms Powell at court during a lunch break when giving evidence, in what Ms Powell described as threatening behaviour seeking to have her settle the case or face legal action dragging on for years.
Mr Boyd denies he made any threats.
The four day Family Court hearing saw Mr Boyd ordered to pay his former de facto partner $70,600.
For relationships of less than three years duration, property division is calculated according to the ‘contribution’ each partner made.
The relationship property pool as at date the two separated in December 2021 totalled $453,000. Of this, the biggest asset was $310,500 being net proceeds from sale of a property at Jacks Point in Queenstown. They purchased Jacks Point for $1.32 million six months before separating.
There were multiple, and conflicting, copies of written agreements for this purchase in evidence before the Family Court.
Judge Doyle ruled Mr Boyd was party to having Ms Powell’s signature forged to the first agreement, lying to lawyers about both having signed, and then later created a fake duplicate agreement for the purchase that he had Ms Powell sign.
Judge Coyle also ruled that Mr Boyd fabricated a third purchase agreement at an inflated price of $1.5 million, part of a fraudulent scheme to obtain increased bank finance; all done without Ms Powell’s knowledge.
Judge Doyle also criticised Mr Boyd for giving false evidence at an earlier preliminary Family Court hearing. Mr Boyd lied when asked if he was personally keeping up payments due on both their mortgage and Jacks Point residency association contributions. He created doctored screenshots from his bank account to create an illusion of payments made.
When ruling on conflicting evidence between Ms Powell and Mr Boyd, Judge Doyle said Mr Boyd lacked credibility and was not truthful.
Having listed the proved financial contributions each made during their relationship, Judge Doyle ruled Ms Powell provided 55 per cent of cash resources; Mr Boyd 45 per cent.
Adjustments were made for money spent by each post separation in relation to Jacks Point plus an allowance for occupation rent payable by Mr Boyd for a period he remained in Jacks Point after separation and prior to sale.
The net result saw Mr Boyd ordered to pay $70,600.
Boyd v. Powell – Family Court (4.09.25)
25.195