Are there problems with those titles? Is the concern that the Court registry
maintains title records in addition to Land Information New Zealand maintaining the
legal title?
The application to the Court
The application was not contentious, however there were two issues for the Court to
determine:
(1) The area of land had no LINZ title, nor any current title in the Court’s records.
One title would represent the totality of the
shares currently held by the Seymour whanau (32.21252 shares) to be vested in (Phillip Douglas
Seymour, Pauline Ruth McKay, Selwyn Gerald Martin Seymour, Edward James Seymour, and
Caroline Ngawaiata Rowena Power) as to their respective shares, with the other title vested in
the remaining owners.
One title would represent the totality of the
shares currently held by the Seymour whanau (32.21252 shares) to be vested in (Phillip Douglas
Seymour, Pauline Ruth McKay, Selwyn Gerald Martin Seymour, Edward James Seymour, and
Caroline Ngawaiata Rowena Power) as to their respective shares, with the other title vested in
the remaining owners.
One title would represent the totality of the
shares currently held by the Seymour whanau (32.21252 shares) to be vested in (Phillip Douglas
Seymour, Pauline Ruth McKay, Selwyn Gerald Martin Seymour, Edward James Seymour, and
Caroline Ngawaiata Rowena Power) as to their respective shares, with the other title vested in
the owners, being the hunau of Tame Horomona Rehe.
One title would represent the totality of the shares currently held by the Seymour whanau (32.21252 shares) to be vested in (Phillip Douglas Seymour, Pauline Ruth McKay, Selwyn Gerald Martin Seymour, Edward James Seymour, and Caroline Ngawaiata Rowena Power) as to their respective shares, with the other title vested in the owners, being the whanāu of Tame Horomona Rehe.