Adamant that he was the sole owner of a Ponsonby property purchased at auction over fifteen years ago, Karl Henry was told by the High Court that his purchase was just another in a family history of collectively buying properties across Auckland and that he held title as trustee for himself and three other family members, including his mother.
Dispute over ownership of seven Brown Street, Ponsonby, was raised straight after the auction with Karl as successful bidder signing the auction purchase in name of himself or nominee.
He then claimed to be the sole owner of Brown Street, since he alone signed the contract.
Brother Frank, who was also present at the auction, told the High Court that auction staff had been told there were multiple purchasers. Since not all were present at the auction, staff said having Karl sign on their behalf ‘as nominee’ would suffice.
Siblings Frank and Nicole and their mother Jeanette subsequently protected their claim by registering a caveat over Brown Street, a caveat which sat on the title for over a decade before legal action was taken to clarify ownership.
The High Court was told of multiple purchases of real estate in and around Auckland over many years by members of the Henry family, title being taken in various combinations of family members. Most purchases were in the inner city Herne Bay/Ponsonby area.
News in 2010 that seven Brown Street was on the market proved significant; it bounded land already owned by family interests.
Karl registered for the auction, making the winning bid at $785,000.
Brother Frank was at his side. Sister Nicole and their mother listened in by conference call.
Karl paid the $78,500 deposit, filling out a blank cheque signed by their mother drawn on her bank account.
Evidence was given of email exchanges between family members prior to the auction suggesting ways in which ownership could be structured and confirming payments to their mother’s bank account, required to cover her payment of the deposit.
After the auction, Karl took title in his own name.
He subsequently paid for Brown Street with his own funds, plus a bank loan.
Other supposed family purchasers were mollified by a comment from Karls’ lawyer that while title was taken in his client’s name alone, this was just a precursor to later sorting out the issue of family ownership.
Buoyed by this advice, their mother paid some $70,000 for renovations, getting Brown Street up to tenantable standard.
Ownership was never settled. A history of dissension between Karl and Frank deepened. Diplomatic intervention by both Nicole and their mother came to nothing.
Eventually in the High Court, Justice MacGillivray ruled Karl held title to Brown Street on trust for all four family members.
By time of the auction there was a common understanding there would be joint ownership, with each contributing to the purchase, he said.
Karl’s claim that he only was to be owner lacked credibility, he ruled.
Karl’s use of money from his mother and his siblings to pay the deposit at auction was not explained. His failure to challenge pre-auction suggestions of how joint ownership might be structured counted against his claim that it was intended all along that he would be sole owner.
At the family’s request, Justice MacGillivray went no further than ruling on ownership.
It was left to negotiation between the four family members to decide how Brown Street expenses incurred over the last fifteen years are to be allocated.
Henry v. Henry – High Court (17.06.26)
26.184