MCVEIGH v DECMIL & ORS [2021] NZHC 2929
The court concluded the consent order created an express trust for retention creditors and that, on the evidence, the applicant's earlier conduct (treating the funds as company property, depletion of the fund, incurring fees without clear court authorisation) together with undisclosed commercial arrangements with DAP gave rise to a real and reasonable appearance of conflict and potential lack of independence; accordingly the applicant was disqualified from appointment as receiver and the court appointed independent receivers (Gareth Hoole and Clive Bush) with powers under the Receiverships Act 1993, remuneration as a first charge on the fund, reporting obligations and leave to seek...
- Citation
- [2021] NZHC 2929
- Parties
- Applicant (liquidator): Dermott Joseph McVeigh; First Respondent (shareholder): Decmil Australia Pty Limited; Second Respondent (subcontractor Claimant): VAE NZ Limited; Second Respondent (subcontractor Claimant): Stanley Construction (Auckland) Limited; Subject Company (in Liquidation): Decmil Construction NZ Limited (in liquidation)
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 1 November 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under S 284 Companies Act 1993 and Part 2 a Construction Contracts Act 2002 in Liquidation/receivership Context / Hearing for Directions and Appointment of Receiver (application for Court Directions / Appointment of Receiver)
- Outcome
- Application to appoint the applicant as receiver refused; court appointed independent receivers Gareth Hoole and Clive Bush to manage the trust fund
- Legal Topics
- Liquidator Powers, Retention Monies (construction Contracts Act), Appointment of Receiver, Conflict of Interest and Apparent Bias, Consent Order Effects, Remuneration and Beddoe Issues, Directors' Duties
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dermott Joseph McVeigh
Applicant (liquidator)
Decmil Australia Pty Limited
First Respondent (shareholder)
VAE NZ Limited
Second Respondent (subcontractor Claimant)
Stanley Construction (Auckland) Limited
Second Respondent (subcontractor Claimant)
Decmil Construction NZ Limited (in liquidation)
Subject Company (in Liquidation)
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 284 Companies Act 1993 and Part 2 a Construction Contracts Act 2002 in Liquidation/receivership Context / Hearing for Directions and Appointment of Receiver (application for Court Directions / Appointment of Receiver)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the liquidator can manage property held on trust that is claimed by retention creditors
- 2 Whether a court-appointed receiver is required to manage the fund and, if so, whether the applicant (liquidator) is suitable
- 3 Whether the fund constituted retention monies under the CCA or was otherwise held on trust
Ratio Decidendi
The court concluded the consent order created an express trust for retention creditors and that, on the evidence, the applicant's earlier conduct (treating the funds as company property, depletion of the fund, incurring fees without clear court authorisation) together with undisclosed commercial arrangements with DAP gave rise to a real and reasonable appearance of conflict and potential lack of independence; accordingly the applicant was disqualified from appointment as receiver and the court appointed independent receivers (Gareth Hoole and Clive Bush) with powers under the Receiverships Act 1993, remuneration as a first charge on the fund, reporting obligations and leave to seek...
Court Disposition
Application to appoint the applicant as receiver refused; court appointed independent receivers Gareth Hoole and Clive Bush to manage the trust fund
Orders
- Appoint Gareth Hoole and Clive Bush as receivers and managers of the trust fund
- Grant receivers the powers of a receiver under the Receiverships Act 1993
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment