Bakery brothers settle out of court

An acrimonious family dispute involving the sale of shares in the Taranaki-based company Yarrows the Bakers has been settled out of court.

Many of the details of the row between Paul and John Yarrow have already been published.

But Associate Judge David Abbott granted an application by the brothers in the New Plymouth High Court for restrictions on access to court documents.

They said that the court record contained references to family issues, to commercially sensitive information relating to the family business and to allegations which should remain confidential to the parties.

"They say it is not in the interests of family harmony or the family business for the information to be made public," Associate Judge Abbott said.

Additionally, the brothers' lawyers told the judge, "serious allegations" had been made by the plaintiff (Paul) which were "strongly contested" by his brother and which had not been determined by the court.

The judge granted the application but said it should not apply to his original judgment or this follow-up judgment.

As reported by NZPA last year, Paul Steven Yarrow had sought damages of just over $10m from his brother, John Alfred Yarrow, saying he had been duped into paying too much to buy him out of the family's bakery business.

He had claimed the financial performance of the company, Yarrows the Bakers, which employs 250 people in Manaia in Taranaki and 150 in Australia, was misrepresented during negotiations for the $45m buyout in 2005.

However, the agreement signed in May that year was full and final and contained a "no sue" clause.

Despite the clause, Paul took his brother to court, saying he had paid too much for John's shares.

Associate Judge Abbott said he accepted that this was a dispute within a family, and that there was potential for "upset and dissension" if the family issues were brought into the public domain.

"It is highly likely that a wish to settle their differences in private has been a significant motivating factor for both parties in reaching settlement," the judge said.

That was a "significant factor" which the court should take into account.

"Were it not for the family's public profile I would consider that it would be unlikely that the public would wish to access the file."

However, the mere fact that the family had a public profile "of itself does not warrant an intrusion into rights of privacy that should otherwise be protected".

The judge said he also accepted that the court file contained material about the family business which could be regarded as commercially sensitive.

"The mere fact of a public profile does not outweigh the family's interests in protecting that information."

He also accepted that the allegations made against the defendant were strongly contested, and had never been tested or determined.

Associate Judge Abbott said he had taken care have taken care to avoid reference to any sensitive information or contention in his latest judgment.

He ruled that nobody, other than the parties, could search the file without court permission, and that a sticker should be placed on the file to alert court staff to his ruling.

- NZPA