CENTRO PILGRIM LTD v MATHEW BARR MOTOR GROUP LTD [2023] NZHC 1522

CENTRO PILGRIM LTD v MATHEW BARR MOTOR GROUP LTD [2023] NZHC 1522

The Court found on the evidence (including contemporaneous email minutes and consistent conduct between March 2020 and July 2022) that the side agreement was varied as Barr asserted; Centro failed to establish an arguable defence of contractual mistake or any other ground to set aside Barr's statutory demand; accordingly Centro's application was dismissed and Barr's cross-application to set aside Centro's statutory demand was granted because Centro's claim was not due and owing. Centro was ordered to pay $56,059.77 within five working days, failing which Barr may apply to liquidate Centro; costs awarded to Barr.

Citation
[2023] NZHC 1522
Parties
Applicant (civ 2023 409 20); Respondent (civ 2023 409 34): Centro Pilgrim Limited; Respondent (civ 2023 409 20); Applicant (civ 2023 409 34): Mathew Barr Motor Group Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
19 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Set Aside Statutory Demands Under S 290 Companies Act 1993 / Judgment Following Hearing (applications Heard 16 May 2023; Judgment 19 June 2023)
Outcome
Centro's application to set aside Barr's statutory demand dismissed; Barr's application to set aside Centro's statutory demand granted; Centro ordered to pay $56,059.77 within five working days or Barr may apply to liquidate Centro; Barr awarded costs on both applications.
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Set Aside Applications, Contractual Variation, Contractual Mistake, Lease Rebates, Liquidation, Costs
Company Law Insolvency Contract Law Tax Law Civil Procedure Statutory Demand Set Aside Applications Contractual Variation +4 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Centro Pilgrim Limited

Applicant (civ 2023 409 20); Respondent (civ 2023 409 34)

Mathew Barr Motor Group Limited

Respondent (civ 2023 409 20); Applicant (civ 2023 409 34)

Procedural Posture

Set Aside Statutory Demands Under S 290 Companies Act 1993 / Judgment Following Hearing (applications Heard 16 May 2023; Judgment 19 June 2023)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the side agreement (rebate arrangement) was varied in March 2020
  2. 2 Whether Centro has an arguable defence based on contractual mistake under the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017
  3. 3 Whether either statutory demand should be set aside on other grounds or in the exercise of the Court's discretion

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found on the evidence (including contemporaneous email minutes and consistent conduct between March 2020 and July 2022) that the side agreement was varied as Barr asserted; Centro failed to establish an arguable defence of contractual mistake or any other ground to set aside Barr's statutory demand; accordingly Centro's application was dismissed and Barr's cross-application to set aside Centro's statutory demand was granted because Centro's claim was not due and owing. Centro was ordered to pay $56,059.77 within five working days, failing which Barr may apply to liquidate Centro; costs awarded to Barr.

Court Disposition

Centro's application to set aside Barr's statutory demand dismissed; Barr's application to set aside Centro's statutory demand granted; Centro ordered to pay $56,059.77 within five working days or Barr may apply to liquidate Centro; Barr awarded costs on both applications.

Orders

  • Centro's application to set aside Barr's statutory demand dismissed
  • Barr's application to set aside Centro's statutory demand granted (Centro's statutory demand set aside)