The issue centred on the allocation of finances between the former spouses
High Court justice Jane Anderson has instructed a couple to “move on with their lives”, ending a divorce case that has been in court since 2015, reported the NZ Herald.
The issue centered on the allocation of finances between the former spouses, who were together for 15 years. The applicant, who was given the moniker “Sarah Lawson”, alleged that her ex-husband, “Barry Goff”, used a trust and his father’s bank accounts to “systematically” dispose of significant relationship property amounts.
Goff emigrated to New Zealand from South Africa in the 1990s and claimed that his family held major funds in his home country, which were then moved to New Zealand. The Alice Goff Trust (AGT) was launched in March 2014, settled by Goff’s father, and appointed Goff as a trustee and discretionary beneficiary.
According to Goff, the AGT contained funds given as gifts by relatives, as well as personal inheritances and savings following his split from Lawson in February 2015.
Lawson initiated legal proceedings that July and said that she did not accept Goff’s claims regarding his family’s money to be true. She alleged that Goff had transferred about $2.3bn in relationship property to the AGT through several bank accounts, attempting to justify them as settlements for debts and loans, among others. The supposed net loss to the relationship property pool was approximately $1.3m.
Goff explained that he had linked personal funds to relationship property and family funds to maximise investment returns, hence the frequent transactions. He said that he maintained spreadsheets to monitor the transactions.
The case received a trial in 2023. An early court decision said that Lawson presented “scattershot” arguments, with a judge noting that her application “invoked virtually every single actionable provision under the [Property (Relationships) Act]”, per a statement published by the Herald.
In another statement published by the Herald, the judge said Goff appeared to have a “remarkably balanced attitude”, while Lawson’s view of him was so poor that her memory of events became unreliable. The judge shot down the allegations, but Lawson proceeded to appeal to the Auckland High Court.
The appeal judge upheld the majority of the rejected claims but decided in Lawson’s favour on a few points. A $310,000 debt to Goff and about $50,000 in savings for his elder sons were reclassified as relationship property; meanwhile, Lawson’s life insurance policies were revalued to $27,000 from $50,000.
As a result of the appeal judge’s ruling, Lawson received $189,000. However, she sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal once more – an application that was rejected by judge Anderson on the grounds that the lack of public or private interest did not justify it.
“This protracted litigation has dragged on in the courts for nearly a decade. [Lawson] bears much of the responsibility for this. She has had many opportunities to make her case and has been allowed to advance arguments late and/or has failed to properly focus her case, in the Family Court and in this court. There is a desperate need for finality”, Anderson said in a statement published by the Herald.
