JULIE MARGARET ALEXANDER V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND HC AK CIV-2012-404-2691

JULIE MARGARET ALEXANDER V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND HC AK CIV-2012-404-2691

Although technical requirements for adjudication were satisfied, the Court considered debtor's arguments and evidence and concluded they did not show it would be unjust or inequitable to adjudicate: debtor had commercial guarantees, obtained benefit from alleged transfers, plausible recoverable assets or security existed (eg Fifer security), and the Official Assignee's investigatory powers and public interest in enforcing guarantees warranted adjudication; accordingly the debtor failed to discharge the onus and adjudication ordered.

Citation
openlaw-70eef515_dcfc_45fc_ab9c_e83f62567cb4.pdf
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Julie Margaret Alexander; Judgment Creditor: Bank of New Zealand
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
6 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Creditor's Application for Adjudication Under the Insolvency Act 2006 / Hearing on Creditor's Application; Adjudication Order Made
Outcome
Order adjudicating Julie Margaret Alexander bankrupt (order timed at 3:07 pm on 5 December 2013 as recorded)
Legal Topics
Adjudication, Act of Bankruptcy, Guarantees, Unauthorised Transfers, Creditors' Remedies, Assets and Security, Official Assignee Powers, Commercial Morality
Insolvency Bankruptcy Commercial Law Adjudication Act of Bankruptcy Guarantees Unauthorised Transfers Creditors' Remedies +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julie Margaret Alexander

Judgment Debtor

Bank of New Zealand

Judgment Creditor

Procedural Posture

Creditor's Application for Adjudication Under the Insolvency Act 2006 / Hearing on Creditor's Application; Adjudication Order Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it would be just and equitable to refuse an order of adjudication despite technical requirements being met
  2. 2 Whether alleged unauthorised transfers and failed development justify declining adjudication
  3. 3 Whether assets or recoverable rights exist making adjudication of utility

Ratio Decidendi

Although technical requirements for adjudication were satisfied, the Court considered debtor's arguments and evidence and concluded they did not show it would be unjust or inequitable to adjudicate: debtor had commercial guarantees, obtained benefit from alleged transfers, plausible recoverable assets or security existed (eg Fifer security), and the Official Assignee's investigatory powers and public interest in enforcing guarantees warranted adjudication; accordingly the debtor failed to discharge the onus and adjudication ordered.

Court Disposition

Order adjudicating Julie Margaret Alexander bankrupt (order timed at 3:07 pm on 5 December 2013 as recorded)

Orders

  • Order adjudicating Julie Margaret Alexander bankrupt
  • Costs to Bank of New Zealand on a category 2B basis together with disbursements as fixed by the Registrar