ONEPATH (NZ) LIMITED V BACS INVESTMENTS AND INSURANCE LIMITED HC AK CIV-2010-404-6546

ONEPATH (NZ) LIMITED V BACS INVESTMENTS AND INSURANCE LIMITED HC AK CIV-2010-404-6546

The defendants did not raise any credible evidential foundation for their defences; the ledger and agreement established the debt and the clear wording of the personal guarantees bound the directors; allegations advanced were inherently improbable or contradicted by contemporaneous documents, so there was no real...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-891a2d46_c37e_4324_a542_e2173c5dc054.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: ONEPATH (NZ) LIMITED; First Defendant: BACS INVESTMENTS AND INSURANCE LIMITED; Second Defendant: BOB WHYE KONG MOO; Third Defendant: ANNE KHEUK HAH HO
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
23 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Contract (business Agreement) / Summary Judgment Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Summary judgment for plaintiff
Legal Topics
Commission Clawback, Personal Guarantee Enforcement, Summary Judgment Principles, Oppression Under Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act, Undue Influence and Independent Legal Advice, Set Off and Contributory Negligence, Investigation of Policyholders
Contract Civil Procedure Insurance Law Guarantee and Suretyship Credit Law Commission Clawback Personal Guarantee Enforcement Summary Judgment Principles +4 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ONEPATH (NZ) LIMITED

Plaintiff

BACS INVESTMENTS AND INSURANCE LIMITED

First Defendant

BOB WHYE KONG MOO

Second Defendant

ANNE KHEUK HAH HO

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract (business Agreement) / Summary Judgment Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff established the quantum of the commission debt
  2. 2 Whether the second defendant was bound by the personal guarantee
  3. 3 Whether lack of independent legal advice or alleged vulnerability rendered the guarantee unenforceable or oppressive

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants did not raise any credible evidential foundation for their defences; the ledger and agreement established the debt and the clear wording of the personal guarantees bound the directors; allegations advanced were inherently improbable or contradicted by contemporaneous documents, so there was no real question to be tried and summary judgment was granted for $300,762.08 against the defendants with leave reserved for solicitor/client costs.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for plaintiff

Orders

  • Name of plaintiff changed from ING Life (NZ) Ltd to Onepath (NZ) Ltd
  • Proceeding against third defendant ANNE KHEUK HAH HO discontinued