PASHA & ANOR V KIWI PROPERTY HOLDINGS LTD HC HAM CIV 2006-419-1470

PASHA & ANOR V KIWI PROPERTY HOLDINGS LTD HC HAM CIV 2006-419-1470

The court concluded that the s 23 conditions for adjudication were established but, exercising its discretion under s 26, granted a one‑month adjournment to allow the debtors to instruct an insolvency practitioner and, if appropriate, file a compliant Part 15 proposal by the specified deadline; costs reserved.

Citation
openlaw-2df68863_9e18_47a9_8e22_c4447cff2ffb.pdf
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Frazana Yazmeen Pasha; Judgment Debtor: Saiyad Mustad Hussein Pasha; Judgment Creditor: Kiwi Property Holdings Limited; Supporting Creditor: W Gartshore Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
30 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petitions Under the Insolvency Act 1967 / Hearing on Petitions; Court Granted Adjournment for One Month to Allow Proposal Consideration
Outcome
Petitions adjourned; conditional further adjournments permitted if a compliant Part 15 proposal is filed; costs reserved
Legal Topics
Adjudication of Debtor, Adjournment for Proposal Under Part 15, Bankruptcy Notices, Acts of Bankruptcy, Court Discretion Under S 26
Insolvency Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Adjudication of Debtor Adjournment for Proposal Under Part 15 Bankruptcy Notices Acts of Bankruptcy Court Discretion Under S 26

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frazana Yazmeen Pasha

Judgment Debtor

Saiyad Mustad Hussein Pasha

Judgment Debtor

Kiwi Property Holdings Limited

Judgment Creditor

W Gartshore Limited

Supporting Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petitions Under the Insolvency Act 1967 / Hearing on Petitions; Court Granted Adjournment for One Month to Allow Proposal Consideration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s 23 requirements for adjudication are satisfied (debt threshold, act of bankruptcy within three months, liquidated sum)
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion under s 26 to refuse or adjourn adjudication
  3. 3 Whether a proposal under Part 15 can be advanced and whether time should be allowed to prepare one

Ratio Decidendi

The court concluded that the s 23 conditions for adjudication were established but, exercising its discretion under s 26, granted a one‑month adjournment to allow the debtors to instruct an insolvency practitioner and, if appropriate, file a compliant Part 15 proposal by the specified deadline; costs reserved.

Court Disposition

Petitions adjourned; conditional further adjournments permitted if a compliant Part 15 proposal is filed; costs reserved

Orders

  • Petitions adjourned to 10am on 26 February 2007
  • Further adjournments will be considered if a proposal complying with Part 15 in accordance with s 140 of the Insolvency Act 1967 is filed in the Court and a copy served on counsel for the petitioning creditor and supporting creditor by 21 February 2007, accompanied by an indication of when the trustee proposes to...