A judge has ruled in favour of Lower Hutt’s mayor Campbell Barry in a messy property dispute involving his estranged mother-in-law and even his political rivals.
The court’s decision has detailed the “irretrievably broken down” family relationship, finding that an order to ultimately remove mother-in-law Debra Harris from the jointly-owned property was needed.
Harris, who has been supported by or linked to three of Barry’s political rivals and critics, has argued having to leave the property will cause her hardship, particularly due to her ongoing treatment for cancer.
But Justice Karen Grau found the hardship suffered by Barry and his wife, Laura Barry, would be higher if Harris were to remain, pointing to Harris’ “intrusion” into their privacy by “stealing their security camera footage to use against them”, as well as allegations from Harris that Barry was “corrupt”.
“This decision is not about fraud or corruption, unlawful building work or mistreatment of animals. Debra has made these and other allegations,” Justice Grau said in her decision, released yesterday.
“Nor is it about politics, or who did what work on the property, or how people choose to live in their homes. Such matters are only relevant to the extent they demonstrate the total breakdown in the relationship between the Barrys and Debra and the hardship claimed by both sides of this unhappy situation.”
The Barrys bought the 5.1ha Wainuiomata property in 2019, jointly with Laura Barry’s parents, John and Debra Harris. They intended to live together on the property and share the ownership costs, but the relationship took a turn for the worse in 2022, when John and Debra Harris separated from each other.
Debra Harris now lives in another dwelling on the property, while John Harris lives overseas and covers both of their shares of the costs for the property. He told the court he had made nine separate offers since 2022 to try to buy out his ex-wife, but has been unsuccessful.
Multiple grievances have since been raised, including Debra Harris’ belief that she and her husband put more money into the property than the Barrys. This was based on the fact their cash deposit was higher, but did not account for the mortgage the Barrys took out to cover their share, which only they are responsible for servicing.
“As John has said (and demonstrated), everything worked out as an equal split between the two couples. Debra says he is not telling the truth. When asked at the hearing why he would do so, she said he was controlled by the Barrys,” Justice Grau said.
She highlighted issues around the finances “as an example of how Debra’s views make it difficult, or impossible, for co-ownership to continue”.
The Barrys wish to carry out renovations that a necessary due to weather damage, but cannot currently do so without Harris’ agreement.
Justice Grau also referred to allegations of corruption that were made against Barry in 2020, which were determined to be unfounded after a Serious Fraud Office investigation.
“However, Debra continues to state that the purchase of the property was ‘dodgy’. She refers to Campbell as ‘corrupt’. She also refers to what she says are the ‘unethical, if not unlawful criminal circumstances’ in which the property was acquired.”
She has appointed Mark Crofskey - a “political commentator and a vocal opponent of Campbell” - as her agent and has had another of Barry’s opponents, Leigh Sutton, as her support person in court.
It was also alleged she has been linked to former councillor Chris Milne, who Barry has taken to court under the Harmful Digital Communications Act over social media posts. Harris told the court she has never met or spoken to Milne.
The judge referred to the way Laura Barry’s relationship with her mother had “deteriorated” since the Harrises separated, with Laura Barry alleging her mother had been making “malicious comments” about them on Facebook and sending upsetting messages to her.
Debra Harris claimed she was a victim of elder abuse, but also said she could simply treat her daughter as a neighbour and get on with her life, Justice Grau said.
“I have not referred to all of the many matters that have been raised. In my view, what I have described above is amply sufficient to demonstrate that the relationship between the co-owners has irretrievably broken down.”
She also noted Harris had acknowledged CCTV footage given to the court of the Barrys was taken by her from their security cameras.
“This is a matter of significant concern, as it suggests a high degree of intrusion into the Barrys’ private affairs.”
Harris has told the court she does not want to leave her home and is unwell following her cancer diagnosis. She said it was “disgusting to be treated like this”.
But Justice Grau said the hardship to the Barrys was higher if Harris was to remain a part-owner of the property.
Removing her ownership of the property would not stop her making further allegations against the Barrys, but it did mean the Barrys no longer had to worry about their public critics being invited onto their property.
“Nor will they need be concerned about people stealing their security camera footage to use against them.
“As I have said, Debra’s beliefs are intractable, even when they are demonstrably mistaken.”
Justice Grau found an order should be made allowing the Barrys to acquire Harris’ share of the property, but has asked parties to make further submissions on what form the order should take and how it should relate to John Harris’ share.
Once this is settled, the judge will allow three months for Debra Harris to vacate the property.
Melissa Nightingale is a Wellington-based reporter who covers crime, justice and news in the capital. She joined the Herald in 2016 and has worked as a journalist for 10 years.