RENAISSANCE BREWING LIMITED v SHEPHARD & KELLOW [2017] NZHC 2744

RENAISSANCE BREWING LIMITED v SHEPHARD & KELLOW [2017] NZHC 2744

Leave to proceed without notice was justified because serving all creditors would risk undermining the ongoing sale process and cause prejudice; the convening period under s239AT(3) was extended by 90 days to 5 February 2018 because the administrators demonstrated that additional time was necessary to complete a sale process that is likely to maximise returns for creditors and RBL can meet ongoing costs during the extension; administrators' solicitor/client costs of the application were ordered to be an administration expense; and limited leave was reserved for interested persons to apply to vary or discharge the orders.

Citation
[2017] NZHC 2744
Parties
Company (subject): Renaissance Brewing Limited; Administrator/applicant: Iain Bruce Shephard; Administrator/applicant: Jessica Kellow
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
9 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Application Under Part 15 a Companies Act 1993 to Extend Convening Period for Watershed Meeting / Interlocutory Without Notice Application Decided on the Papers
Outcome
Application granted in full
Legal Topics
Voluntary Administration, Watershed Meeting, Extension of Convening Period, Without Notice Applications, Administrator Duties, Moratorium on Creditors
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Voluntary Administration Watershed Meeting Extension of Convening Period Without Notice Applications Administrator Duties +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Renaissance Brewing Limited

Company (subject)

Iain Bruce Shephard

Administrator/applicant

Jessica Kellow

Administrator/applicant

Procedural Posture

Application Under Part 15 a Companies Act 1993 to Extend Convening Period for Watershed Meeting / Interlocutory Without Notice Application Decided on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to proceed without notice should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the convening period may be extended under s239AT(3) of the Companies Act 1993
  3. 3 Whether extension is necessary to enable completion of a sale process to maximise creditor returns

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to proceed without notice was justified because serving all creditors would risk undermining the ongoing sale process and cause prejudice; the convening period under s239AT(3) was extended by 90 days to 5 February 2018 because the administrators demonstrated that additional time was necessary to complete a sale process that is likely to maximise returns for creditors and RBL can meet ongoing costs during the extension; administrators' solicitor/client costs of the application were ordered to be an administration expense; and limited leave was reserved for interested persons to apply to vary or discharge the orders.

Court Disposition

Application granted in full

Orders

  • Leave granted to make the application without notice
  • Convening period extended under s239AT(3) of the Companies Act 1993 up to and including 5 February 2018