COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v SAGATO IOSEFO AOGA AMATA TRUST HC AK CIV-2012-404-003795
The defendant was served with a valid statutory demand and failed to pay, secure or compound the debt and lodged no objections; the verified debt and failure to comply evidenced insolvency and it was just and equitable to wind up the defendant, so the Court ordered liquidation and appointed the Official Assignee as...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- openlaw-4281a831_1f47_4cea_a617_6211207e511c.pdf
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Commissioner of Inland Revenue; Defendant: Sagato Iosefo Aoga Amata Trust
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 13 August 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Company Winding Up (statutory Demand) / Application for Liquidation / Hearing for Winding Up Order
- Outcome
- Order that the Sagato Iosefo Aoga Amata Trust be wound up in liquidation; Official Assignee appointed as liquidator; costs and disbursements awarded to the plaintiff.
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Demand, Liquidation, Tax Assessment, Service of Statutory Demand, Costs
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Plaintiff
Sagato Iosefo Aoga Amata Trust
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Company Winding Up (statutory Demand) / Application for Liquidation / Hearing for Winding Up Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant was indebted to the Commissioner for assessed tax including penalties and interest
- 2 Whether a statutory demand pursuant to s 289 Companies Act 1993 was validly served and complied with
- 3 Whether failure to comply evidenced insolvency such that it was just and equitable to wind up the defendant
Ratio Decidendi
The defendant was served with a valid statutory demand and failed to pay, secure or compound the debt and lodged no objections; the verified debt and failure to comply evidenced insolvency and it was just and equitable to wind up the defendant, so the Court ordered liquidation and appointed the Official Assignee as liquidator and awarded costs.
Court Disposition
Order that the Sagato Iosefo Aoga Amata Trust be wound up in liquidation; Official Assignee appointed as liquidator; costs and disbursements awarded to the plaintiff.
Orders
- Order that Sagato Iosefo Aoga Amata Trust be wound up in liquidation
- Official Assignee appointed as liquidator
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v SAGATO IOSEFO AOGA AMATA TRUST HC AK CIV-2012- 404-003795 [13 August 2012]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDAUCKLAND REGISTRYCIV-2012-404-003795[2012] NZHC 2026IN THE MATTER OF the Charitable Trusts Act 1957 and of theCompanies Act 1993BETWEEN THE COMMISSIONER OF INLANDREVENUEPlaintiffAND SAGATO IOSEFO AOGA AMATATRUSTDefendantHearing: 13 August 2012Counsel: M F Nelson for the PlaintiffNo Appearance of or for the RespondentJudgment: 13 August 2012(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF DUFFY JSolicitors: Inland Revenue Department (Legal and Technical Services) P O Box 76198 Manukau 2241 for the Plaintiff[1] The defendant is a charitable trust incorporated under the Charitable Trusts Act 1957. The plaintiff, who is the Commissioner of Inland Revenue having statutory responsibility for the collection of taxes in New Zealand, claims that the defendant is indebted to him for the total sum of $194,154.78, being an assessed amount of tax remaining outstanding, including penalties and interest.[2] The plaintiff has filed an affidavit verifying that the allegations of debt made in the statement of claim are true and correct. Those statements are to the effect that there are no outstanding objections or challenges in relation to the assessment of the debt; that on 1 May 2012, the defendant was served in accordance with orders for service made by this Court with a statutory demand, pursuant to s 289 of the Companies Act 1993, by Linda Ann Moss demanding payment of a sum then due, being $175,658.56.[3] The defendant has not paid the plaintiff the debt or any part thereof that is presently due. Nor has the defendant sought to secure or compound such debt for the plaintiff to its reasonable satisfaction before the expiration of the s 289 statutorydemand. The defendant's failure to pay or seek to secure or compound the debt sought in the statutory demand evidences it being insolvent and unable to pay its debts. In such circumstances, I find that it is just and equitable that the defendant be put into liquidation, and I order accordingly.[4] The time of the making of the order is 10.10 am.[5] I appoint the Official Assignee as liquidator.[6] Costs are awarded to the plaintiff on a category 2B basis. They come to the sum of $2,786. The plaintiff is also entitled to disbursements of $1,110.61, making total costs and disbursements $3,896.61.Duffy J