New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Accounting for profits

Legal area

Court

23 Jul 2021

DEWAKI v KATO [2021] NZHC 1869

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1869
Court

High Court

The court refused to order the plaintiff to give the requested particulars now. Instead the appropriate exercise of discretion required defendants to amend their statement of defence to include their accounting and to disclose documents; the plaintiff must then file a reply specifying which parts she accepts and, where she rejects, give full particulars for surcharge or falsification. This balances the fiduciary onus on defendants, defendants' possession of records, and the plaintiff's procedural disadvantage as a foreign litigant.
21 Dec 2020

SMITH v BALL [2020] NZHC 3485

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3485
Court

High Court

Because CMDL failed to produce invoices, bank records and credible explanations for challenged expenses and withdrawals, the Court disallowed those deductions, adjusted FY2019 rent by averaging FY2017–18, calculated total net rental due to plaintiff as $73,312.82 for FY2010–FY2020 and awarded simple interest to judgment date at specified rates.
3 Dec 2020

S A MORRISON and THE AUDAINE TRUST TRUSTEES LTD v AUTUMNAL INVESTMENTS LTD [2020] NZHC 3189

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3189
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the Court found that Morrison and O'Reilly discussed and agreed a 'no cost trustee' arrangement in early April 2013 and at the 12 April 2013 meeting; Morrison was induced by O'Reilly's oral undertaking to transfer the properties and would not have done so otherwise; denial of the common intention would be fraudulent in equity; accordingly Autumnal holds the properties as trustee of an institutional constructive trust for the Audaine Trust and equitable relief (declaration and vesting subject to payment of mortgage, agreed trustee remuneration and reimbursement)…
21 Feb 2020

ARRIESGADO v GALLAGHER FAMILY INVESTMENTS LTD [2020] NZHC 232

Citation

[2020] NZHC 232
Court

High Court

The Main Agreement constituted a dealing that purported to give a beneficial interest in accessory units to a person who was not the registered owner of a principal unit, which contravened s53(1) UTA; under s53(7) that dealing was void ab initio and s71 CCLA applied, while the transfers from GFI to the Reyes were valid under the s53(1) exception; accordingly the Reyes have been full legal and equitable owners of the four accessory units since 14 June 2018 and GFI/Gallagher must account for income derived from them.
9 Aug 2018

RHH LIMITED v SANDRINE ANDERSON [2018] NZHC 2032

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2032
Court

High Court

The application for further discovery was granted in part: the defendants must file and serve a further affidavit of documents by 22 August 2018 limited to (a) VGA Ltd/Virginia Gomes file documents to the extent Helice Properties Ltd or Ms Anderson have a right of inspection (noting financial statements are relevant and likely to exist), and (b) texts and correspondence between Miriam Roberts and Ms Anderson for the specified periods; Ms Anderson must depose as to whether she backed up emails when changing servers in May 2013 and whether she has searched/access to those backups. Requests for…
12 Jun 2018

WALLACE v ALTAN [2018] NZHC 1337

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1337
Court

High Court

Goodwill may have market value despite absence of a restraint of trade where a substantial non‑transportable client base and continuity of location and staff confer value; on the facts the continuing salon retained most goodwill and the District Court valuation methodology (EBPIDT multiplier leading to a net award of $39,233) was correct, so the appeal fails and the cross‑appeal is not entertained further.
10 Aug 2016

VERNON V PUBLIC TRUST [2016] NZCA 388

Citation

[2016] NZAR 1375
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court dismissed the appeal because an EPOA gives rise to fiduciary duties enforceable in equity; the Judge's alternative findings that Ashley breached those fiduciary duties and acted unconscionably were supported by evidence (including forged cheques, improper internet transfers, false WINZ forms and dissipation of the estate); s 28 Limitation Act 1950 applied to postpone limitation due to equitable fraud; Beverley was liable for knowing receipt; accordingly the High Court judgment requiring restitution (net $280,354) with interest and costs was upheld.
15 Dec 2014

LIBRA DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED v CLARK [2014] NZHC 3148

Citation

[2014] NZHC 3148
Court

High Court

The Court held that the cessation of interest was linked to the project‑by‑project actual or notional winding up/completion dates fixed by the Court and that, for those notional winding ups, the notional proceeds reduce the amount on which interest is payable (i.e. the interest liability is reduced project‑by‑project and is not confined to interest on lending that was strictly project‑specific). The plaintiffs' application to give effect to that construction was granted in respect of the three projects identified.
8 Jul 2014

HOLLAND CORPORATE LTD v HOLLAND [2014] NZHC 1584

Citation

[2014] NZHC 1584
Court

High Court

As a director, Mr Holland breached fiduciary duties by diverting payments and services to himself or other entities, thereby profiting at HCL's expense; equity requires him to account for profits of AUD 440798 and pay equitable compensation of AUD 166407.5 and NZD 450000; judgment is entered against him for those sums.
31 Oct 2013

CURTIS v GIBSON [2013] NZHC 2884

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2884
Court

High Court

The correct measure of recoverable profit was the realised sums received by Gibson or his controlled interests from the introduction of Pindan into IHSL (NZD 2.6m gross), excluding amounts credited as shareholder advances or compulsorily reinvested, apportioned to exclude value attributable to Ihouz, resulting in NZD 1.5m attributable to the Habode/Australia joint venture and NZD 750,000 payable to the plaintiff (half share) plus interest from 1 September 2008.