FLETCHER DISTRIBUTION LTD v ROGERS [2022] NZHC 1445

FLETCHER DISTRIBUTION LTD v ROGERS [2022] NZHC 1445

The application for substituted service was adjourned because the creditor failed to demonstrate recent reasonable attempts at personal service, offered no explanation for an almost six‑month delay in seeking substituted service, and provided no evidence the debtor still resided at the nominated address such that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] NZHC 1445
Parties
Judgment Creditor: Fletcher Distribution Ltd trading as Placemakers Hornby; Judgment Debtor: Kimberley Jean Rogers
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
20 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Proceedings Creditor's Application for Adjudication Order / Application for Substituted Service; Adjourned Pending Further Evidence
Outcome
Application for substituted service adjourned; no order made at this time
Legal Topics
Substituted Service, Service of Process, Adjudication Order, Bankruptcy Notice, High Court Rules R 6.8
Insolvency Civil Procedure Bankruptcy Substituted Service Service of Process Adjudication Order Bankruptcy Notice High Court Rules R 6.8

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fletcher Distribution Ltd trading as Placemakers Hornby

Judgment Creditor

Kimberley Jean Rogers

Judgment Debtor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Proceedings Creditor's Application for Adjudication Order / Application for Substituted Service; Adjourned Pending Further Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substituted service under r 6.8 should be ordered
  2. 2 Whether reasonable and recent attempts to serve have been made
  3. 3 Whether the proposed method of substituted service is likely to bring documents to the debtor's attention

Ratio Decidendi

The application for substituted service was adjourned because the creditor failed to demonstrate recent reasonable attempts at personal service, offered no explanation for an almost six‑month delay in seeking substituted service, and provided no evidence the debtor still resided at the nominated address such that the proposed methods would likely bring the documents to her attention; the court required a further attempt at service and evidence before any substituted service order could be made.

Court Disposition

Application for substituted service adjourned; no order made at this time

Orders

  • Application for substituted service adjourned pending further attempts at personal service and provision of evidence that the proposed substituted service will likely bring the documents to the debtor's attention
  • No order for substituted service will be made until the creditor has undertaken at least one further attempt at service and filed evidence of the likelihood that substituted service would notify the debtor