CENTRAL EQUIPMENT COMPANY LTD V CIR HC TAU CIV 2003-470-856

CENTRAL EQUIPMENT COMPANY LTD V CIR HC TAU CIV 2003-470-856

The applications were struck out because they were collateral attacks on final and determinative orders (including the 2 October 2006 winding up order and the Court of Appeal's decisions), Mr Faloon had no standing or authority to represent the company, and the Court therefore had no jurisdiction to entertain the applications; accordingly they were unarguable and an abuse of process and indemnity costs were awarded against Mr Faloon.

Citation
openlaw-26d63db7_2fda_4a5a_8e54_d7b8ad751ecd.pdf
Parties
Defendant/applicant: Central Equipment Company Ltd; Plaintiff/respondent: Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
15 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Company Winding Up / Statutory Demand / Insolvency / Judgment (strike Out Application to Review and Directions)
Outcome
Application to review Associate Judge Faire's decisions struck out; Court directed registry to refuse further original filings from Mr Faloon or his representatives; indemnity costs awarded against Mr Faloon.
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Winding Up, Set Aside Application, Standing to Represent Company, Res Judicata/finality, Strike Out, Joinder, Costs
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Tax Law Statutory Demand Winding Up Set Aside Application Standing to Represent Company +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Central Equipment Company Ltd

Defendant/applicant

Commissioner of Inland Revenue

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Company Winding Up / Statutory Demand / Insolvency / Judgment (strike Out Application to Review and Directions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Faloon had authority or standing to represent Central Equipment Company Ltd
  2. 2 Whether the applications filed by Mr Faloon were collateral attacks on final orders and thus outside the Court's jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether the earlier orders (10 May 2006 and 2 October 2006) and Court of Appeal decisions extinguished the proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The applications were struck out because they were collateral attacks on final and determinative orders (including the 2 October 2006 winding up order and the Court of Appeal's decisions), Mr Faloon had no standing or authority to represent the company, and the Court therefore had no jurisdiction to entertain the applications; accordingly they were unarguable and an abuse of process and indemnity costs were awarded against Mr Faloon.

Court Disposition

Application to review Associate Judge Faire's decisions struck out; Court directed registry to refuse further original filings from Mr Faloon or his representatives; indemnity costs awarded against Mr Faloon.

Orders

  • Strike out Mr Faloon's application to review the orders made by Associate Judge Faire in CIV 2003-470-856 and CIV 2003-470-923
  • Registry directed not to accept any further original documents filed by Clarence John Faloon or his representatives in either proceeding