Revell and Vicki Buckham say their successful Environment Court appeal in December, and a court decision last month ordering the neighbours to pay $150,000 towards their massive legal bill, should prompt them to ‘‘take a long and hard look in the mirror’’.
Mr Buckham told Allied Media this week the dispute, which dragged on for five years, could have been avoided ‘‘had some elementary courtesies been observed’’.
In 2021, Queenstown council commissioners declined to grant the Buckhams consent to host up to 100 events a year at the property — an application then opposed by 11 neighbours.
The couple appealed the decision to the Environment Court, ultimately scaling back their proposal to 50 ‘‘low-key’’ events — mostly weddings — that included strict controls over issues such as noise and parking.
Their lawyer told the court the couple were not motivated by financial gain, as the income from events ‘‘far from covered’’ the costs of maintaining the property — which has five category 1-listed historic buildings.
However, a group of neighbours maintained their opposition on the grounds the events were causing excessive noise.
Last December, the court granted the appeal, finding the events would have only ‘‘minor effects’’ on neighbours.
Then, last month, Judge Prudence Steven KC ordered the neighbours to pay the Buckhams $150,000 towards their $340,000-plus legal bill.
In her decision, Judge Steven said the neighbours had unreasonably rejected six offers by the Buckhams to settle the case, which ‘‘should have been seen by the opposing parties as an opportunity to realistically reassess their position’’.
Aspects of the neighbours’ legal case were ‘‘without merit’’, and their experts had shown a ‘‘lack of impartiality’’ in their evidence.
She also rejected claims by some neighbours that the Buckhams’ counsel had ‘‘intimidated’’ them or ‘‘treated them with contempt’’.
In contrast, evidence given by some neighbours had reflected their long-standing ‘‘antagonism’’ towards the Buckhams, and ‘‘did not assist the court in resolving the appeal’’.
Mr Buckham said the costs award was an ‘‘extraordinary amount’’ by Environment Court standards, and it had ‘‘accepted every aspect of our arguments in support of the costs application, and rejected all of the opposing parties’ allegations’’.
The couple have held permitted events on the property for over three decades, and allow community groups and individuals to use the property, including for fundraisers.
