THOMAS FREDERICK MAZLIN KING AND JUDITH RING KING AS PARTNERS OF THE TFM AND JRK KING PARTNERSHIP AND IN THEIR PERSONAL CAPACITIES V PFL FINANCE LIMITED HC AK CIV 2012-404-001734

THOMAS FREDERICK MAZLIN KING AND JUDITH RING KING AS PARTNERS OF THE TFM AND JRK KING PARTNERSHIP AND IN THEIR PERSONAL CAPACITIES V PFL FINANCE LIMITED HC AK CIV 2012-404-001734

The plaintiffs failed to establish a serious question to be tried on waiver/estoppel or oppressive conduct: their estoppel claim lacked credibility against contemporaneous documents and reliable evidence; the receiver relied on apparently qualified, apparently sound professional advice and acted intelligibly and in good faith in taking possession and ceasing farming; the balance of convenience and overall justice favored the creditor because reinstating plaintiffs would risk further default and erosion of PFL's secured position, therefore interim mandatory relief was denied.

Citation
openlaw-bb468e70_bcf0_4426_bddf_5396f72f4d02.pdf
Parties
First Plaintiff: Thomas Frederick Mazlin King and Judith Ring King as partners of the TFM and JRK King Partnership and in their personal capacities; Second Plaintiff: Havelock Farms Limited as trustee of the Forebank Farm Trust; First Defendant: PFL Finance Limited; Second Defendant: Craig Beecroft
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
3 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Injunction and Receivership Dispute / Interim Injunction Hearing (application for Mandatory and Prohibitory Relief)
Outcome
Application for interim relief dismissed; interim orders continued for three working days to enable appeal
Legal Topics
Interim Injunction, Waiver and Estoppel, Oppressive Exercise of Powers, Duties of Receiver, Property Law Notice, Power of Sale
Contract Property Receivership Equity Consumer Credit Law Interim Injunction Waiver and Estoppel Oppressive Exercise of Powers +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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Frederick Mazlin King and Judith Ring King as partners of the TFM and JRK King Partnership and in their personal capacities

First Plaintiff

Havelock Farms Limited as trustee of the Forebank Farm Trust

Second Plaintiff

PFL Finance Limited

First Defendant

Craig Beecroft

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Injunction and Receivership Dispute / Interim Injunction Hearing (application for Mandatory and Prohibitory Relief)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a representation or waiver by PFL estopped it from treating Havelock/Plaintiffs as in default
  2. 2 Whether the Property Law Act notice was validly served and whether Plaintiffs were deprived of opportunity to remedy default
  3. 3 Whether PFL's appointment of a receiver and the receiver's taking possession and cessation of farming was oppressive, reckless, negligent or in bad faith

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs failed to establish a serious question to be tried on waiver/estoppel or oppressive conduct: their estoppel claim lacked credibility against contemporaneous documents and reliable evidence; the receiver relied on apparently qualified, apparently sound professional advice and acted intelligibly and in good faith in taking possession and ceasing farming; the balance of convenience and overall justice favored the creditor because reinstating plaintiffs would risk further default and erosion of PFL's secured position, therefore interim mandatory relief was denied.

Court Disposition

Application for interim relief dismissed; interim orders continued for three working days to enable appeal

Orders

  • Plaintiffs' application for interim mandatory and prohibitory relief dismissed
  • Existing interim orders to continue for three working days from judgment to permit appeal filing