LIAN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT (NZ) LTD V GAO HC AK CIV-2011-404-006064

LIAN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT (NZ) LTD V GAO HC AK CIV-2011-404-006064

Having found a good arguable case based on the plaintiffs' evidence of alleged misrepresentations and suspicious transactions, and credible evidence the defendants intend to leave New Zealand imminently, the Court concluded there is a real and imminent risk that funds in New Zealand bank accounts will be removed or dissipated; accordingly freezing orders and examination of assets were justified and granted.

Citation
openlaw-e4e3b6c5_8b40_4776_8827_d115baa8c06f.pdf
Parties
First Plaintiff: Lian International Investment (NZ) Limited; Second Plaintiff: Peipei Xu; First Defendant: Chen Xi Gao (aka Helen Gao); Second Defendant: Shu Hua Yao (aka Steve Yao); Third Defendant: S & H Lincoln Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
3 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Freezing Order Application / Interim Application for Freezing Orders Pending Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Freezing orders and ancillary relief granted on interim basis
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Freezing Order, Asset Preservation, Contractual Remedies Act 1979, Fair Trading Act 1986, Conspiracy to Injure, High Court Rules R 32
Contract Law Tort Equity and Injunctions Commercial Law Civil Procedure Misrepresentation Freezing Order Asset Preservation +4 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lian International Investment (NZ) Limited

First Plaintiff

Peipei Xu

Second Plaintiff

Chen Xi Gao (aka Helen Gao)

First Defendant

Shu Hua Yao (aka Steve Yao)

Second Defendant

S & H Lincoln Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Freezing Order Application / Interim Application for Freezing Orders Pending Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a good arguable case of misrepresentation and related causes of action
  2. 2 Whether there are identifiable assets in New Zealand against which an order can attach
  3. 3 Whether there is a real and imminent risk of dissipation or removal of assets from the jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

Having found a good arguable case based on the plaintiffs' evidence of alleged misrepresentations and suspicious transactions, and credible evidence the defendants intend to leave New Zealand imminently, the Court concluded there is a real and imminent risk that funds in New Zealand bank accounts will be removed or dissipated; accordingly freezing orders and examination of assets were justified and granted.

Court Disposition

Freezing orders and ancillary relief granted on interim basis

Orders

  • Freezing the funds held in the BNZ bank account 02-0152-0088988-00 held in the name of one or more of the defendants
  • Freezing the funds held in any other BNZ bank account or in any ASB bank account in the names of any or all of the defendants