WALKER v FORBES [2017] NZHC 1212
Because the plaintiffs cannot meet adverse costs without third-party funding and the litigation funder (SPF/LPF) stands to commercially profit, the court exercised its discretion to require substantial security for costs. The merits were treated as largely neutral but did not outweigh the policy that a commercial funder should bear a significant share of the defendants' cost risk; offers of a parent company guarantee were insufficient. The court ordered global security of NZD 2,630,000 for defendants other than Henderson, NZD 150,000 for Henderson, and NZD 450,000 for expert costs (part of global figure), with staged deadlines for provision.
- Citation
- [2017] NZHC 1212
- Parties
- First Plaintiff (liquidator): Robert Bruce Walker; First Plaintiff (liquidator): John Marshall Scutter; Second Plaintiff: Property Ventures Limited (in liquidation); Third Plaintiff: Five Mile Holdings Limited (in receivership and in liquidation); Fourth Plaintiff: Cashel Ventures Limited; Fifth Plaintiff: Tay Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation); Sixth Plaintiff: Livingspace Properties Limited (in receivership and in liquidation); Seventh Plaintiff: Beechnest Ventures Limited (in liquidation); Eighth Plaintiff: Tuam Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation); Ninth Plaintiff: Castle Street Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation); Tenth Plaintiff: Lichfield Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation); Eleventh Plaintiff: 92 Lichfield Limited (in receivership and in liquidation); Twelfth Plaintiff: St Asaph Ventures Limited (in liquidation); Thirteenth Plaintiff: Montecristo Construction Company Limited (in liquidation); First Defendant: Austin John Forbes; Second Defendant: Alister Spedding Johnston; Third Defendant: Gordon Lewis Hansen; Fourth Defendant (bankrupt): David Ian Henderson; Fifth Defendant: Adolf de Roos; Sixth Defendant: Daniel James Godden; Seventh Defendant: PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) (sued as a firm); Third Party: VERO Liability Insurance
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 6 June 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Companies Act 1993 Liquidation and Director/auditor Claims; Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs Prior to 12 Week Trial (application Decided)
- Outcome
- Application for security for costs granted; substantial global security ordered from plaintiffs (litigation funder exposure rejected as sole solution). No stay ordered at this stage.
- Legal Topics
- Security for Costs, Litigation Funding, Directors' Duties, Auditor Negligence, Trading While Insolvent, Banning Order S383
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Robert Bruce Walker
First Plaintiff (liquidator)
John Marshall Scutter
First Plaintiff (liquidator)
Property Ventures Limited (in liquidation)
Second Plaintiff
Five Mile Holdings Limited (in receivership and in liquidation)
Third Plaintiff
Cashel Ventures Limited
Fourth Plaintiff
Tay Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation)
Fifth Plaintiff
Livingspace Properties Limited (in receivership and in liquidation)
Sixth Plaintiff
Beechnest Ventures Limited (in liquidation)
Seventh Plaintiff
Tuam Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation)
Eighth Plaintiff
Castle Street Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation)
Ninth Plaintiff
Lichfield Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation)
Tenth Plaintiff
92 Lichfield Limited (in receivership and in liquidation)
Eleventh Plaintiff
St Asaph Ventures Limited (in liquidation)
Twelfth Plaintiff
Montecristo Construction Company Limited (in liquidation)
Thirteenth Plaintiff
Austin John Forbes
First Defendant
Alister Spedding Johnston
Second Defendant
Gordon Lewis Hansen
Third Defendant
David Ian Henderson
Fourth Defendant (bankrupt)
Adolf de Roos
Fifth Defendant
Daniel James Godden
Sixth Defendant
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) (sued as a firm)
Seventh Defendant
VERO Liability Insurance
Third Party
Procedural Posture
Companies Act 1993 Liquidation and Director/auditor Claims; Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs Prior to 12 Week Trial (application Decided)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is reason to believe plaintiffs will be unable to pay defendants' costs if unsuccessful
- 2 How the court should exercise its discretion under High Court Rules r 5.45
- 3 What quantum and form of security is appropriate and timing for provision
Ratio Decidendi
Because the plaintiffs cannot meet adverse costs without third-party funding and the litigation funder (SPF/LPF) stands to commercially profit, the court exercised its discretion to require substantial security for costs. The merits were treated as largely neutral but did not outweigh the policy that a commercial funder should bear a significant share of the defendants' cost risk; offers of a parent company guarantee were insufficient. The court ordered global security of NZD 2,630,000 for defendants other than Henderson, NZD 150,000 for Henderson, and NZD 450,000 for expert costs (part of global figure), with staged deadlines for provision.
Court Disposition
Application for security for costs granted; substantial global security ordered from plaintiffs (litigation funder exposure rejected as sole solution). No stay ordered at this stage.
Orders
- Plaintiffs to provide security for costs and expert witness expenses of defendants other than Mr Henderson in the global sum of 2630000 NZD.
- Plaintiffs to provide security for Mr Henderson's costs in the sum of 150000 NZD.
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