Part of bitter and hostile litigation following end of their twenty year relationship, Anna Cook complains two family trusts holding millions of dollars in assets set up by former partner Ian Hair are primarily supporting Mr Hair financially while leaving her in the cold. The High Court removed all trustees, appointing an independent trustee required to take an even-handed approach to beneficiary requests.
Both Ms Cook and Mr Hair are discretionary beneficiaries of two family trusts: the Hair Family Trust and the Murian Trust.
Ms Cook says Hair Family owns an extensive portfolio of residential properties; Murian a residential property in Takapuna she describes as being worth more than six million dollars.
The two trusts are controlled by Mr Hair and Auckland lawyer Douglas Burgess.
A bitter relationship property dispute in the Family Court spilled over into the High Court with Ms Cook complaining trust assets are being used to support Mr Hair’s litigation costs, while she is forced to live hand-to-mouth, struggling to support herself and their son.
Evidence was given of pleas to the trustees for financial support being either ignored or fobbed off with replies stating there were currently insufficient funds available.
Ms Cook claims some $500,000 from trust sources were made available to Mr Hair for payment of legal fees.
Justice Wilkinson-Smith ruled that Mr Hair had used his position as trustee to benefit himself personally and to disadvantage Ms Cook. Mr Burgess as the current independent trustee had been unable to act with sufficient independence, given his relationship with Mr Hair, she said.
Both were removed as trustee on grounds that Mr Hair’s conflict of interest led to a lack of impartiality; replaced by Comac Trustees as sole trustee.
In addition, Ms Cook asked that terms of each Trust be amended to remove Mr Hair as ‘appointer,’ and with it his power to unilaterally name new trustees and beneficiaries.
As appointer, Mr Hair could circumvent the court order appointing Comac Trustees, she said.
Declining to change trust wording, Justice Wilkinson-Smith warned Mr Hair he would be answerable to the court if his power of appointment were used contrary to the current court ruling.
Cook v. Hair – High Court (21.11.25)
26.017