R G GARLICK and D L GARLICK [2018] NZHC 1634

R G GARLICK and D L GARLICK [2018] NZHC 1634

The court granted approval because the statutory requirements of ss 327, 330 and 331 were satisfied, the proposals were accepted by the required majorities representing all indebtedness, the proposals were reasonable and beneficial to creditors, and no grounds under s 333(3) existed to refuse approval.

Citation
R G GARLICK and D L GARLICK [2018] NZHC 1634
Parties
Insolvent Applicant: Richard Graham Garlick; Insolvent Applicant: Dianna Lynne Garlick; Trustee: Geoffrey Sabastian Eric Brown
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
4 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Approval of Proposals Under the Insolvency Act 2006 / Court Hearing for Approval After Creditors' Acceptance
Outcome
Application for approval of each proposal granted
Legal Topics
Proposal Approval, Creditors' Meeting, Statutory Compliance, Court Discretion
Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Proposal Approval Creditors' Meeting Statutory Compliance Court Discretion

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Graham Garlick

Insolvent Applicant

Dianna Lynne Garlick

Insolvent Applicant

Geoffrey Sabastian Eric Brown

Trustee

Procedural Posture

Application for Approval of Proposals Under the Insolvency Act 2006 / Court Hearing for Approval After Creditors' Acceptance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statutory requirements for approval under ss 327–333 of the Insolvency Act 2006 were met
  2. 2 Whether the terms of the proposals were unreasonable or not calculated to benefit the general body of creditors
  3. 3 Whether it was expedient to approve the proposals

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted approval because the statutory requirements of ss 327, 330 and 331 were satisfied, the proposals were accepted by the required majorities representing all indebtedness, the proposals were reasonable and beneficial to creditors, and no grounds under s 333(3) existed to refuse approval.

Court Disposition

Application for approval of each proposal granted

Orders

  • Applications for approval of the proposals of Richard Graham Garlick and Dianna Lynne Garlick are granted