RECEIVABLES MANAGEMENT (NZ) LIMITED AND ORS V SJ HEATH HC AK CIV-2010-404-1818

RECEIVABLES MANAGEMENT (NZ) LIMITED AND ORS V SJ HEATH HC AK CIV-2010-404-1818

The Court approved the proposal because the statutory procedural requirements were satisfied, the creditors (representing over 95% of estimated claims) validly approved the proposal, the proposal is reasonable and delivers a significant return (~70%) to creditors, notice was given and there were no objections, and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-d8c6a66d_fdb8_4507_9943_190981b687ca.pdf
Parties
Insolvent: Simon James Heath; Creditor: Receivables Management (NZ) Limited; Creditor: Dun & Bradstreet (New Zealand) Limited; Creditor: General Electric International Inc trading as GE Money New Zealand
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
19 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for Court Approval of Part 5 Sub‑part 2 Proposal Under the Insolvency Act 2006 (s333) / Hearing and Decision on S333 Approval
Outcome
Application granted; creditors' proposal approved.
Legal Topics
Creditors' Proposal Approval, Creditor Voting, Trustee Procedural Compliance, Statutory Notice Requirements, Priority Payments and Costs
Insolvency Law Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Creditors' Proposal Approval Creditor Voting Trustee Procedural Compliance Statutory Notice Requirements Priority Payments and Costs

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon James Heath

Insolvent

Receivables Management (NZ) Limited

Creditor

Dun & Bradstreet (New Zealand) Limited

Creditor

General Electric International Inc trading as GE Money New Zealand

Creditor

Procedural Posture

Application for Court Approval of Part 5 Sub‑part 2 Proposal Under the Insolvency Act 2006 (s333) / Hearing and Decision on S333 Approval

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the procedural requirements of Part 5 Sub‑Part 2 (s331 et seq) were complied with
  2. 2 Whether the proposal is reasonable and calculated to benefit the general body of creditors
  3. 3 Whether it is expedient for the Court to approve the proposal

Ratio Decidendi

The Court approved the proposal because the statutory procedural requirements were satisfied, the creditors (representing over 95% of estimated claims) validly approved the proposal, the proposal is reasonable and delivers a significant return (~70%) to creditors, notice was given and there were no objections, and s333(4) requirements were met; accordingly approval was expedient and should be granted.

Court Disposition

Application granted; creditors' proposal approved.

Orders

  • Approval given to the creditors' proposal dated 18 March 2010 pursuant to s333 Insolvency Act 2006
  • Leave granted to amend the application so it is an application by the provisional trustee Christine Liggins