Barbara Morris intended that son Richard be given the option to buy her plant nursery at Pokeno on her death, paying current market price. Disputes between siblings, delays in appointing executors following her 2021 death and further delays in completing a planned subdivision of land containing the nursery have caused legal chaos.
As a first step, the High Court was asked to interpret Ms Morris’ will.
At extremes: Richard could be allowed to buy the disputed land cheaply; or alternatively, lose entirely the right to buy.
In a will signed in 2014, Ms Morris gave son Richard the option to buy forty hectares of land she owned on O’Leary Road in Pokeno, south of Auckland.
Wanting to ensure little delay in winding up her estate, the will specified that executors must offer this option to Richard within six months of her death; the price assessed at current ‘government valuation,’ if less than six months old, failing that at current market value fixed by a valuer.
Ms Morris later amended her 2014 will with a 2019 codicil: gifting part of the land to Richard on her death; the existing option remaining, entitling Richard to purchase the balance.
The price paid by Richard falls into the residue of Ms Morris’ estate, to be divided equally between her four children, including Richard.
Infighting between siblings led to executors named in Ms Morris’ will declining to accept appointment.
Delays in finding replacement executors meant new executors were not appointed until six months and six days after Ms Morris’ death.
Richard’s option to buy no longer existed, siblings claim.
Justice Robinson ruled the six month time limit from death for an option to buy was not critical.
Ms Morris intended her estate be wound up promptly. The six month period in her will emphasised this. But other terms of her will, allowing executors to carry on her nursery business while a subdivision she proposed was completed, signals that offering Richard an option to buy may take more than six months, Justice Robinson ruled.
Valuing the land offered to Richard was problematic.
‘Government valuation’ of land does not exist. Justice Robinson interpreted this phrase in Ms Morris’ will to mean current rating valuation.
Richard claimed he is entitled to buy at the rating valuation as at their mother’s death.
Justice Robinson ordered a new valuation be prepared by a registered valuer; the 2020 rating valuation is more than twelve months old.
A 2022 valuer’s report valued the land at four million dollars.
The court was told disaffected siblings have court proceedings underway, challenging validity of both the 2014 will and subsequent codicil. They claim an unsigned 2018 document should stand as their mother’s final will.
If successful, the High Court’s interpretation of her 2014 will becomes redundant.
Darlow v. Halpin – High Court (11.03.26)
26.099