Since joining Pitt & Moore in 2016 Andrea has been involved in a number of contested applications for resource consents.  These included obtaining consents for the dredging of contaminated sediments and associated reclamation; for the operation of a large pack house and cool storage facility; for a Comprehensive Housing Development; and for a day care facility.  Andrea has also acted for submitters in opposition to proposals and is capable of giving advice as to the wisdom of taking steps in opposition or not.

Andrea regularly gives advice in both non-contentious and contentious relationship property matters.  This includes separation agreements as well as contracting out agreements.  Having made successful applications to set aside a contracting out agreement, Andrea knows the pitfalls to avoid.  Her general litigation experience puts her in good stead to deal with matters if they need to escalate to a determination in the Family Court or High Court but her expertise in this area means that most matters settle without the need for proceedings and if proceedings are necessary, resolved without the need for a Court trial.

Andrea is particularly proud of her involvement in an appeal to the High Court for an order under section 38 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 by which the Court can appoint an independent expert to undertake an inquiry as to valuation and related matters – Brainich-Felth-Eilander v Ward (No. 2) [2016] NZHC 3176.  For the first time, the High Court set out the scope of the powers of the appointee and recognised that section 38 was under-utilised.  Section 38 is particularly useful when one party is being obstructive and an independent person is needed to gather information so that the extent and value of the relationship property pool can be determined.

Death is one form of separation, so Andrea is very familiar with the steps that need to be taken by a spouse when their partner dies or by children or grandchildren when they have not been sufficiently provided for.  With people living longer, having successive relationships, and having children from different relationships, estate litigation is increasingly common and more complicated.  Andrea is experienced in giving advice on claims that can be brought:

• by spouses, partners, children, and grandchildren against an estate under the provisions of the Family Protection Act 1955
• under the Law Reform (Testamentary Promises) Act 1947 for provision under an estate for services provided to the deceased pursuant to a promise.

While Andrea does her utmost to keep her clients out of Court, she is well placed to go to trial if a reasonable outcome cannot be obtained any other way.  She completed the Advanced Litigation Skills course in 2016 and has appeared as sole or lead counsel in many proceedings.

The more notable cases Andrea has been involved in include:

1. Lead counsel in the successful defence of an application for the grant of probate for a contested will – the High Court set aside the will on the basis that the will-maker did not have capacity and the will had been procured by undue influence – Kingsford v Mathers [2024] NZHC 2470.
2. Sole counsel for the successful application to remove and replace the executors of an estate on the grounds of conflict – Jones v Jones [2023] NZHC 1408.
3. Sole counsel in the successful defence of an appeal concerning the Family Protection Act 1955 – Emeny v Mattsen [2024] NZHC 291.
4. Sole counsel in the successful application for an order extinguishing an easement over a property – Re Baigent [2021] NZHC 3081.
5. Sole counsel in the successful application for an order extinguishing several easements over land in the process of being subdivided – Re Stoke Valley Holdings Ltd [2020] NZHC 430.
6. Sole counsel in the successful defence of an appeal concerning the Family Protection Act 1955 – Waine v Tigg [2018] NZHC 1976.
7. Second counsel in a significant decision from the High Court concerning the application of section 38 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 (which allows the Court to order an inquiry into relationship property assets) – Brainich-Felth-Eilander v Ward (No. 2) [2016] NZHC 3176.
8. Second counsel in an important decision from the High Court concerning litigation costs as damages – Peters v Peters (No 2) [2013] NZHC 1061.