Daniel accepted pumping money into the two entities through companies he controls and proposed continuing to source funding to cover the companies\u2019 operating expenses.<\/p>\n
Daniel disputed the family\u2019s misappropriation allegations and argued Henriette had engineered the deadlock, meaning she did not have \u201cclean hands\u201d in seeking liquidation.<\/p>\n
However, Justice Grant Powell rejected Daniel\u2019s \u201cclean hands\u201d argument, including his claim that the breakdown was \u201cdemonstrably caused by Henriette\u201d. <\/p>\n
\u201cNeither trusts the other,\u201d he said, as he ruled in favour of Henriette\u2019s application to liquidate the debt-laden companies.<\/p>\n
\u201cSimply put, they do not mince words. The scale of the allegations is itself telling: Henriette and the rest of the immediate family contend that Daniel has already misappropriated at least $40m from the Nakhle Group. <\/p>\n
\u201cDaniel\u2019s position is that he is entitled … to specific Nakhle Group assets worth in excess of $60m, debt free.\u201d<\/p>\n
Justice Powell said that since Henriette\u2019s husband, Elias, had stepped back from the family business, Daniel had been able to \u201ceffectively sideline\u201d his mother from managing the two defendant companies, Karaka Estate Ltd (KEL) and Byerley Park Ltd (BPL), of which the pair are joint directors. <\/p>\n
Daniel\u2019s position appeared to be based on the proposition that Henriette was \u201cnot entitled to question\u201d the way he had run the companies with \u201ctacit agreement\u201d from his father. <\/p>\n
But the judge said this misunderstood the role of a director. It would be wrong for Henriette to \u201cacquiesce to Daniel\u2019s decisions\u201d in breach of her own professional responsibilities to the companies.<\/p>\n
Sybelle Nahra Nakhle and Daniel Nakhle. Photo \/ Norrie Montgomery<\/p>\n
Justice Powell found both companies were heavily indebted, clearly insolvent and unable to pay debts as they fell due.<\/p>\n
Much of the money was owed to the Nakhle Treasury Trust. <\/p>\n
In ruling that liquidation was the appropriate outcome, the judge dismissed an application by Daniel to instead put the firms into receivership, saying this would \u201cmarkedly advantage\u201d Daniel, and \u201cinevitably favour\u201d his interests over those of his parents and siblings. <\/p>\n
It has also emerged that after registering a new company, Ardmore Finance Ltd (AFL), and purchasing more than $7m in family debt from Westpac Bank on the eve of an April court hearing, AFL sent a letter signed by Daniel to a family trust demanding \u201cimmediate payment\u201d.<\/p>\n
The May 1 letter also advised that AFL \u201cmay look to commencing enforcement action under the securities and guarantees\u201d. <\/p>\n
His lawyers had earlier rejected suggestions the debt reassignment was a \u201cpretty desperate last-minute tactic\u201d designed to give Daniel \u201cleverage\u201d over his family, and now insist the letter of demand has \u201cno bearing on the liquidation applications\u201d.<\/p>\n
However, Henriette argued it showed Daniel was taking a \u201cdifferent and more assertive approach\u201d to that expressed earlier this year when he promised to grant a three-month reprieve on the loans.<\/p>\n
The change in tactics was telling, Henriette submitted to the court. <\/p>\n
\u201cThat Daniel\/AFL immediately called up the debt and took enforcement steps strongly suggests anything but a wish to maintain the status quo for which Daniel was previously advocating.\u201d<\/p>\n
Her other sons, David and Roger, have now obtained without notice injunction orders to prevent AFL taking enforcement action, including if the companies were placed in liquidation by the court. <\/p>\n
Lebanese Honorary Consul Henriette Nakhle, QSM, (centre left) surrounded by family after being recognised as a Member of NZ Order of Merit in the 2023 New Year’s Honours for her contribution to the Lebanese community.<\/p>\n
Bitter and protracted legal battle<\/p>\n
The family\u2019s dirty laundry is being aired publicly as part of a bitter and protracted legal dispute relating to the management and division of their considerable wealth. <\/p>\n
The Nakhle family was once listed on the NBR richlist with an estimated fortune of $200m.<\/p>\n
However, asked by Justice Powell for a \u201cballpark\u201d figure as to how much was at stake, Daniel\u2019s lawyer, Mark Sandelin, estimated the family\u2019s current assets at around $120m. <\/p>\n
The famil<\/a>y have interests in a diverse portfolio of industries, including horse racing, property investment, early childhood education and quarrying.<\/p>\n They are also politically connected – National MP Rima Nakhle is a member of the family through marriage (she is not involved in the court action). <\/p>\n But the family\u2019s financial success has been marred by infighting and legal skirmishes, which has driven a wedge between mother and son. <\/p>\n Daniel claims he is owed $60m in real estate assets after a family agreement was brokered a decade ago by friend and former Manukau mayor Sir Barry Curtis. <\/p>\n After falling out with his parents, he launched legal action in 2022 claiming his family had reneged on the deal.<\/p>\n The family, however, claim they are not bound by the terms of the Curtis agreement and launched counter-proceedings relating to millions of dollars advanced to the companies from the Nakhle Treasury Trust.<\/p>\nThe Honorary Consul of Lebanon in New Zealand, Henriette Nakhle, MNZM, QSM, meets Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters in 2024. <\/p>\n
Justice Grant Powell questioned how Daniel Nakhle had been able to “magic up” $7.5m in a matter of days. Photo \/ Jason Dorday<\/p>\n