THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE V JUNCTION SKI SHOP (1992) LIMITED HC WANG CIV 2008-483-93

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE V JUNCTION SKI SHOP (1992) LIMITED HC WANG CIV 2008-483-93

On the material before the Court the defendant was insolvent and unable to pay its debts as they fell due, produced no adequate evidence of a viable sale or compromise, the statutory demand was not set aside and continued trading risked worsening creditors' positions; consequently the proper course was to refuse the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-b0f1f45d_262e_4745_bd9c_1918cc5a528f.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: Commissioner of Inland Revenue; Defendant: Junction Ski Shop (1992) Limited; Creditor in Support: Snoworld Sports Limited; Creditor in Support: South Ruapehu FM Limited; Applicant/creditor: Rojo Distribution (NZ) Limited; Applicant/creditor: Jones Brothers Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
30 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Companies Act 1993 Liquidation Application / Oral Hearing and Judgment on Liquidation Application
Outcome
Defendant company placed into liquidation; liquidators appointed; costs and remuneration orders made; adjournment refused.
Legal Topics
Liquidation, Statutory Demand, Insolvency, PAYE and GST Debts, Appointment of Liquidators, Adjournment Application
Company Law Insolvency Law Tax Law Liquidation Statutory Demand Insolvency PAYE and GST Debts Appointment of Liquidators +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Inland Revenue

Plaintiff

Junction Ski Shop (1992) Limited

Defendant

Snoworld Sports Limited

Creditor in Support

South Ruapehu FM Limited

Creditor in Support

Rojo Distribution (NZ) Limited

Applicant/creditor

Jones Brothers Limited

Applicant/creditor

Procedural Posture

Companies Act 1993 Liquidation Application / Oral Hearing and Judgment on Liquidation Application

  1. 1 Whether the defendant company is insolvent and unable to pay its debts as they fall due
  2. 2 Whether an adjournment should be granted to allow the company to finalise a sale or compromise
  3. 3 Whether liquidation and appointment of liquidators is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

On the material before the Court the defendant was insolvent and unable to pay its debts as they fell due, produced no adequate evidence of a viable sale or compromise, the statutory demand was not set aside and continued trading risked worsening creditors' positions; consequently the proper course was to refuse the adjournment and order liquidation, appoint liquidators, approve remuneration subject to s.284 and permit individual exercise of powers under s.242.

Court Disposition

Defendant company placed into liquidation; liquidators appointed; costs and remuneration orders made; adjournment refused.

Orders

  • Company placed into liquidation
  • Craig Alexander Sanson and Vivian Judith Fatupaito appointed liquidators