Gloriavale v BNZ: Fight over accounts

Gloriavale is fighting to keep its Bank of New Zealand (BNZ) accounts open after the bank tried to dump the Christian community as a customer.

BNZ wants to terminate its relationship of more than 40 years with the controversial West Coast organisation, citing human rights concerns.

Gloriavale, known as the Christian Church Community Trust, sought an interim injunction to keep its bank accounts open pending a trial with no formal date (potentially months or years away), at a hearing before Justice Helen Cull at the High Court in Christchurch yesterday.

BNZ was ordered to keep Gloriavale’s accounts open by Justice Rachel Dunningham a day before they were to be closed in November, pending formal arguments at yesterday’s hearing. This came after the community took the bank to the High Court in Greymouth.

The bank’s decision to close Gloriavale’s accounts followed an Employment Court ruling in May last year that found three former members – who began working at the community from age 6 – were employees rather than volunteers.

Hosea Courage, Levi Courage and Daniel Pilgrim, who were born in Gloriavale, described being exploited by leaders who claimed their work was ‘‘chores’’ to meet the community’s needs based on shared beliefs. There was no breach by Gloriavale of BNZ’s terms and conditions, the Christian community’s lawyer Richard Raymond, KC, told Justice Cull.

BNZ based its decision to terminate Gloriavale’s accounts on the Employment Court ruling, but had since added to its argument using a Wikipedia page of at least 17 allegations against the community, many of which were factually incorrect, Raymond said.

‘‘It doesn’t appear to be a challenge by BNZ that a good proportion of matters relied on by them other than the (Employment Court) decision were sourced from Wikipedia or the media.

‘‘It has no basis to support an issue as important as this one.’’

Gloriavale had made significant changes to better itself since the Employment Court decision, but BNZ still refused to engage constructively with it, Raymond said. The bank had also changed its reasons for the termination, he argued. ‘‘There must be a reason, in the law, that is rational, reasonable, and needs to be based on fact.

‘‘To suggest otherwise would permit the bank to terminate a relationship on the basis it doesn’t like someone, or based on a hearsay statement not verified, or because the views of the bank and client do not agree.’’

The impact of termination would be devastating on a vulnerable community that existed to serve the families within it, Raymond said. ‘‘Customers trust banks not to close their accounts out of nowhere without a breach.’’

In response, BNZ lawyer Will Irving said it was the bank’s right to terminate accounts of its customers at any time, for any reason. Even so, the forced child labour revealed at Gloriavale following the Employment Court decision in May was a breach of the bank’s human rights policy and warranted termination, Irving submitted.

Justice Cull questioned whether BNZ had terminated all accounts of those convicted of such crimes, such as slavery. She reserved her decision.