WORLDTEL NZ LTD V KIM HC AK CIV-2009-404-001158

WORLDTEL NZ LTD V KIM HC AK CIV-2009-404-001158

Court held second defendant liable in conversion for wholesale value of the $5, $10, $20 and $50 I-Phone cards she deliberately supplied to retailers; money had and received claim failed for lack of evidence linking specific cash/cheques to her; knowing receipt liability limited to monies or assets traceable to the fraud that remained in her control as at 6 March 2009; dishonest assistance not established because her knowledge and conduct did not meet the objective standard of dishonesty.

Citation
openlaw-f2efcef3_dc90_4285_9579_b1edd2e8910c.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: Worldtel NZ Limited; First Defendant: Jae Kap Kim; Second Defendant: Seong Hee Han
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
30 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil: Conversion, Knowing Receipt, Dishonest Assistance, Money Had and Received / Judgment (post Trial)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff in part: second defendant found liable in conversion for wholesale value of converted $5, $10, $20 and $50 I-Phone cards; liable in knowing receipt only to extent funds/assets traceable to fraud remained in her control on 6 March 2009; money had and received and dishonest assistance claims...
Legal Topics
Conversion, Knowing Receipt, Dishonest Assistance, Money Had and Received, Constructive Trust, Account of Profits
Tort Law Equity Restitution Commercial Law Conversion Knowing Receipt Dishonest Assistance Money Had and Received +2 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Worldtel NZ Limited

Plaintiff

Jae Kap Kim

First Defendant

Seong Hee Han

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil: Conversion, Knowing Receipt, Dishonest Assistance, Money Had and Received / Judgment (post Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether second defendant converted I-Phone cards by delivering and selling them to retailers
  2. 2 Whether second defendant is liable for money had and received for cash/cheques she collected
  3. 3 Whether second defendant is liable for knowing receipt of proceeds from converted cards/top-ups

Ratio Decidendi

Court held second defendant liable in conversion for wholesale value of the $5, $10, $20 and $50 I-Phone cards she deliberately supplied to retailers; money had and received claim failed for lack of evidence linking specific cash/cheques to her; knowing receipt liability limited to monies or assets traceable to the fraud that remained in her control as at 6 March 2009; dishonest assistance not established because her knowledge and conduct did not meet the objective standard of dishonesty.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff in part: second defendant found liable in conversion for wholesale value of converted $5, $10, $20 and $50 I-Phone cards; liable in knowing receipt only to extent funds/assets traceable to fraud remained in her control on 6 March 2009; money had and received and dishonest assistance claims...

Orders

  • Second defendant liable in conversion for wholesale value of converted $5, $10, $20 and $50 I-Phone cards
  • Second defendant liable in knowing receipt to the extent monies or assets traceable to the conversion and unaccounted top-up charges were in her control on 6 March 2009