“We believed we were there for the filming and that was the purpose of the lease,” business co-owner and a defendant in the subsequent damages claim, Holly Robson-Burrell, said.
“We didn’t sign up for that but we tried hard to make it work.”
Evidence in the legal case alleged the pair had approached Edmonds with the idea of running the restaurant venture and that before they signed the sub-lease, they were told about the production and that a film crew would be present on-site.
Riverhaven Estate Ltd, now Riverhaven Foundation Ltd, owned by Edmonds and his wife Liz Davies, was the plaintiff company in the trial heard in the Nelson District Court on Thursday.
Damages were sought from the Robson-Burrells’ company, All About Chocolate (AAC), as the first defendant in the case.
The Robson-Burrells, as co-directors of their company and second and third defendants, provided guarantees that made them liable for the damages equivalent to the unpaid rent of more than $60,000 plus the unpaid outgoings.
Riverhaven also claimed the value of extra works carried out on the premises, reopening costs, losses incurred by underperformance, reputational damage and 14% interest on the unpaid rent.
The statement of claim showed Riverhaven agreed to undertake a number of works to the property before and during the sub-lease, but the Robson-Burrells said in their defence that they were more extensive than what they agreed to.
The case was described by the plaintiff’s lawyer, Nic Lawrence, as “relatively straightforward”.
Among the list of claims he fought to debunk were that the Robson-Burrells consented to being filmed.
The ITV three-part documentary series, Noel Edmonds’ Kiwi Adventure, chronicled the veteran British presenter’s life in New Zealand, where he relocated and then took on the rural hospitality and leisure venture in the Motueka Valley.
Filming for the series, which recently screened in the UK, began in September 2024 and ended in December that year.
Disagreement over their eventual involvement in the filming, including Tony Robson-Burrell’s claim he became a “main character” in the programme and their allegations it interfered with the running of the hospitality business on-site, formed a key plank in the defendants’ argument.
Exit ‘out of the blue’
The Robson-Burrells had been trading for a month when it “became clear” they were “not handling the stress” of running three venues, Lawrence alleged.
He said “out of the blue”, in November 2024, the couple sent an email terminating the lease and said they would not be operating the next day.
They followed up with an email to staff that said, “Sorry about the bombshell but we’re leaving River Haven with immediate effect”.
The couple, who have operated businesses in the hospitality sector for some years, alleged they had been pressured and “harassed” by Edmonds, who had “too much control” over the running of the restaurant when they wanted complete autonomy.
They alleged the terms of the sub-lease had been breached through others entering the premises after hours without their consent, using their stock, leaving a mess, influencing staff, interference with the running of the restaurant, criticisms, insistence on viewing staff contracts, requests for regular meetings, harassment via email and the use of audio and visual CCTV on the premises without their consent.
They also claimed the terms of the sub-lease were “substantially different” from what they had agreed to.
This included a bigger renovation, which impacted their alcohol licence and costs associated with it, not advising them that a coffee caravan on-site had no operating licence, greater involvement in filming than agreed to and “continual interference with the day-to-day running of our business”.
Floods, filming and fallout
Edmonds and his wife bought the $30 million property in 2022 as a hospitality venture with a vineyard, pub, cafe, wellness centre and general store.
The property was in the news last year as among many stricken by the floods in Tasman.
Edmonds said at the time that he was “in a state of shock” after the extreme weather caused devastating damage to the estate in Ngātīmoti, near Motueka.
It happened a year after the sub-lease was signed in late July 2024, the filming for ITV and then the fallout.
“Our belief is we know how to run a successful restaurant and trusted our abilities,” Holly Robson-Burrell said at the hearing before Judge Mary Beth Sharp, who at times veered into instructing the self-represented pair on trial procedure.
At one point, when the couple’s argument teetered on their personal views of Edmonds and other matters that could not advance their argument, Judge Sharp suggested the couple simply hadn’t done their due diligence.
Walked out after two months
The 12-month lease term started in September 2024, with annual rent of $66,000 (plus GST) at $5500 monthly.
The terms included a one-month rental holiday for September 2024, with the rent for October and November 2024 not due until December 2024.
The Robson-Burrells walked out two months after the start date, which Riverhaven viewed as them having repudiated the sub-lease by refusing to trade and deserting the venue it had agreed to tenant.
Riverhaven argued it had suffered losses, reputational damage and considerable stress as a result of the abandonment.
Lawrence said, in essence, Riverhaven entered into a sub-lease it was not looking for, then two months later, the sub-lessees allegedly realised they couldn’t do it any more and walked away.
“As a result, Riverhaven was left scrambling and has asked for damages and guarantees to be upheld to cover their losses,” Lawrence said.
He said AAC had “muddied the waters” by saying it was entitled to cancel, that their “right to the quiet enjoyment” of the premises had been breached and that there had been a “misrepresentation” of Riverhaven’s finances.
“What they don’t do is oppose the fact they walked away from the lease but they said it was justified in the circumstances,” Lawrence said.
Holly Robson-Burrell ended Thursday’s hearing by saying they had “every right to cancel the lease”, then confusingly added they would still like to be operating there.
Judge Sharp said their argument appeared to be based on a number of misunderstandings.
“The moral of the story when dealing in business like this is you need to consult a lawyer.”
Judge Sharp had initially indicated she would reserve her decision but later decided to reopen the trial to allow the defendants a chance to more adequately present their “kernel of a defence”.
She said the court would be unable to afford natural justice to the defendants if this didn’t happen.
The trial would resume on a date yet to be determined.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.