DAMIEN GRANT AND STEVEN KHOV LIQUIDATORS OF GRASTIN INVESTMENTS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) V GRANT ERROLL STINSON HC AK CIV 2008-404-008244

DAMIEN GRANT AND STEVEN KHOV LIQUIDATORS OF GRASTIN INVESTMENTS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) V GRANT ERROLL STINSON HC AK CIV 2008-404-008244

The application was properly treated as an originating application under r19.4 and r31.35(4); the liquidators achieved the objective of obtaining documents and explanations and are therefore the successful party for costs; costs are awarded to the liquidators on a scale 2B basis with specified time allocations; however the claimant's request for a 50% uplift is declined because the respondent's conduct was not sufficiently unreasonable.

Citation
openlaw-d2c3e31f_79de_4bd1_9d59_479320041aca.pdf
Parties
Applicants/liquidators: Damien Grant and Steven Khov, Liquidators of Grastin Investments Limited (in liquidation); Respondent/sole Director: Grant Erroll Stinson
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
26 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Liquidation Proceeding Under the Companies Act 1993 (application for Examination and Production of Documents) / Costs Judgment After Resolution of Substantive Application
Outcome
Liquidators awarded costs; uplift and respondent's costs claims denied
Legal Topics
Liquidator Powers (s261/s266), Production of Trustee Records, Examination of Director, Originating Vs Interlocutory Procedure, Costs and Uplift
Company Law Insolvency Trust Law Civil Procedure Liquidator Powers (s261/s266) Production of Trustee Records Examination of Director Originating Vs Interlocutory Procedure +1 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Damien Grant and Steven Khov, Liquidators of Grastin Investments Limited (in liquidation)

Applicants/liquidators

Grant Erroll Stinson

Respondent/sole Director

Procedural Posture

Liquidation Proceeding Under the Companies Act 1993 (application for Examination and Production of Documents) / Costs Judgment After Resolution of Substantive Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the liquidators were entitled to production of records and examination of the director in relation to the company acting as corporate trustee of a trading trust
  2. 2 Whether the application under s266/for directions should be treated as an originating application or an interlocutory application for costs purposes
  3. 3 Which party was successful for costs and whether costs uplift was warranted for unreasonable conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The application was properly treated as an originating application under r19.4 and r31.35(4); the liquidators achieved the objective of obtaining documents and explanations and are therefore the successful party for costs; costs are awarded to the liquidators on a scale 2B basis with specified time allocations; however the claimant's request for a 50% uplift is declined because the respondent's conduct was not sufficiently unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Liquidators awarded costs; uplift and respondent's costs claims denied

Orders

  • Grant Erroll Stinson to pay the liquidators' costs on a scale 2B basis in accordance with the time allocations specified by the Court
  • Liquidators' claim for a 50% uplift on costs is declined