DILWORTH TRUST BOARD v N M BRIGHT [2017] NZHC 2282

DILWORTH TRUST BOARD v N M BRIGHT [2017] NZHC 2282

The statutory requirements of s13 were met, the debtor failed to provide reliable evidence that he could pay the debt or that he owned assets of sufficient value to avoid adjudication, ownership disputes over the plant and chattels are unresolved and for other proceedings/parties to determine, and there were no compelling or equitable reasons to refuse adjudication; accordingly an order for adjudication was made.

Citation
[2017] NZHC 2282
Parties
Judgment Creditor: Dilworth Trust Board; Judgment Debtor: Neville Maxwell Bright; Secured Creditor/notice of Intention to Appear: BNZ (Bank of New Zealand)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
6 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Adjudication Application for Bankruptcy Under the Insolvency Act 2006 / Judgment on Application for Adjudication (order for Adjudication Made)
Outcome
Order for adjudication of Neville Maxwell Bright made; adjudication effective 4:00 pm on 6 November 2017; costs awarded to Dilworth on a 2B basis with disbursements.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Under S13, Bankruptcy Notice, Set Off/counterclaim, Ownership of Chattels, PPSR and General Security Agreement, Commercial Guarantees
Insolvency Bankruptcy Property Commercial Law Secured Transactions Adjudication Under S13 Bankruptcy Notice Set Off/counterclaim +3 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dilworth Trust Board

Judgment Creditor

Neville Maxwell Bright

Judgment Debtor

BNZ (Bank of New Zealand)

Secured Creditor/notice of Intention to Appear

Procedural Posture

Adjudication Application for Bankruptcy Under the Insolvency Act 2006 / Judgment on Application for Adjudication (order for Adjudication Made)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statutory requirements for adjudication under s13 of the Insolvency Act 2006 were met
  2. 2 Whether the debtor had assets (plant and chattels) sufficient and available to pay the judgment debt
  3. 3 Whether the debtor's claimed ownership of chattels constituted a valid set off or counterclaim to defeat adjudication

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory requirements of s13 were met, the debtor failed to provide reliable evidence that he could pay the debt or that he owned assets of sufficient value to avoid adjudication, ownership disputes over the plant and chattels are unresolved and for other proceedings/parties to determine, and there were no compelling or equitable reasons to refuse adjudication; accordingly an order for adjudication was made.

Court Disposition

Order for adjudication of Neville Maxwell Bright made; adjudication effective 4:00 pm on 6 November 2017; costs awarded to Dilworth on a 2B basis with disbursements.

Orders

  • Order adjudging Neville Maxwell Bright bankrupt, effective 4:00 pm on 6 November 2017
  • Mr Bright to pay Dilworth Trust Board's costs on a 2B basis together with disbursements