HUNTER ESTATE CASE

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVII, Issue 182, 3 July 1937, Page 10

HUNTER ESTATE CASE

SPEECH FOR DEFENCE. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, July 2. The Hunter estate case was continued in the Supreme Court this afternoon, Mr Weston continuing liis speech for the defendants. “We have had the case of an estate with big demand liabilities, and, in the main, only frozen assets,” said Mr Weston. “That estate has been nursed through the most difficult times, I suppose, in the memory of most living men, and it emerges safe and sound, with an increasing income. And when we take into account the state of the station on Sir George’s death I do submit that we must enlarge our respect for these gentlemen.” Mr Weston discussed details of the estate’s condition at Sir George’s death and the improvements that had been made since. Lady Hunter’s expert wtnesses, he said, could not have spent more than twenty hours on the station, which was 8000 acres and carried 14,000 sheep. Yet they formed a considered opinion. Mr Weston described Lady Hunter s attitude, and said that the start of the proceedings was like “aeroplanes over London.” . ~ “There was no declaration of war, said Mr Weston. “We were engaged in correspondence, and the next thing wo get is a writ; and I suggest that for Lady Hunter that is not a fair thing.” Mr Justice Smith: You arc right up to date in your manner of declaring hostilities. Mr Weston : The first intimation we get is bombs over London. PARTIES “WAR WEARY.” Referring to plaintiff’s complaint about trustees not taking legal advice in 1932 as to whether they should bring an action to recover a gift of £ll6O inado by Sir George Hunter to the Paul Hunter estate, Mr Weston said that though Lady Hunter was an indomiable litigant, the parties at that time were Incoming war weary. There had been a lot of litigation, the cost of which had amounted to something like £6OOO. The trustees, if they had honestly thought there was no ground for taking action, would naturally have been hesitant of embarking on any further litigation. Apart altogether from the case, there was a feeling the estate had been penalised enough. His Honour; The difficulty was they were personally concerned in the matter. Counsel: How could they act if they were personally concerned? They couldn’t sue themselves. His Honour: Very well. nobody would expect them to sue themselves. They announced they’ were ready to take counsel’s opinion. Why didn’t they take it? Seeing they were personally concerned, one would have thought they would have taken counsel’s opinion. Counsel: They were satisfied there was no case. “JUDGED OWN CASE.’ His Honour: I suppose there were other people concerned besides Lady Hunter, and seeing they were personally concerned I should say they should have taken every step to make their own position perfectly clear. Counsel: They thought there was nothing in the complaint. His Honour; But they were judges in their own' cause, that is tho trouble. Counsel; That is so, but at the same time they were honest people. His Honour: Yes, no doubt they honestly thought there was nothing in it, hut is that the way trustees can act when they are personally concerned? What do you say is the test I should apply now? Counsel: The test is whether they acted honestly and reasonably in the circumstances.

His Honour: Suppose I say they should have got independent advice at least? Suppose I Think now that independent advice should be obtained? Counsel: How can they obtain it if they themselves have to present the case for an opinion ? His Honour: That should he done by independent solicitors hut to expect trustees to resign in every case where there is conflict of interests would, I think, be carrying it too far. The law provides for the position. Lady Hunter stated the law correctly. She said : “If you don’t care to do so, I will do it myself.” That is what the law allowed her to do. SEPARATELY ADVISED.

Air Weston added that Lady Hunter had her own solicitors. She was sperntely advised and if she had wanted to pursue the point she could have done so without any difficulty. His Honour :. What is to be done to-day? How can these two gentlmen wjio arc personally interested in this matter, decide whether this £1166 should lie repaid or not? How can they properly take steps to have that determined when they have control of all papers and documents? Mr Weston said they could hand over all documents to Mr Willis and he could take charge of them. Whatever the position, it did not involve their retirement from the trusteeship. He submitted that they had been guilty of no misconduct and Mr Willis could not go so far as to submit that because the trustees had a personal interest, they should he removed. His Honour said the law provided that in such a case trustees would get no remuneration. With the interests of an infant involved, the trustees should have taken some opinion either of counsel or the Court. Mr Weston said he considered that course would be carrying the matter very far.

H,is Honour said that leaving it to Lady Hunter would he asking her to pay for it personally. The question was that £1166 had gone from the Sir George Hunter estate and should be returned. “The trustees arc personally concerned.” added His Honour, “and I do say that most trustees, if an infant wero involved, would have taken advice either of counsel or the Court.” The case is to he continued on Monday.