New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Appointment of receiver

Legal area

Court

17 Nov 2023

ZHENG v JUN YUE INVESTMENT LTD [2023] NZHC 3244

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3244
Court

High Court

The Court awarded costs to the plaintiffs against the second defendant, Ping Fan, totalling $62,329.80, rejecting the respondent's submissions for an 80% reduction and for excluding forensic accounting disbursements, applying appropriate bandings (including 2B where awarded), and declining to award costs against the corporate defendant because plaintiffs hold shares in it; costs are to be determined now rather than deferred to trial.
13 Nov 2023

MARBLE ARCH TRUSTEE LTD v LI [2023] NZHC 3196

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3196
Court

High Court

Application for appointment of a receiver was refused because Marble Arch was not a judgment creditor and alternative, orthodox enforcement mechanisms under the High Court Rules were available, so the Court's inherent jurisdiction to appoint a receiver was not engaged.
20 Apr 2023

MOSES v STARK [2023] NZHC 844

Citation

[2023] NZHC 844
Court

High Court

Partnership dissolved by operation of law on death of a partner; given dissolution, the existence of a management deadlock, the surviving partner's incapacity and the attorney's conflicts, the likelihood of delay in Family Court, evidence of neglect of farm and risk of intermingling or misuse of partnership assets, the court exercised its discretion to appoint interim receivers and managers to preserve and manage partnership business and recover loans while restricting sale of real estate pending further directions.
29 Sept 2022

RE CAMERON AND ROBERTSON-BROWN [2022] NZHC 2495

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2495
Court

High Court

The Trust is unable to meet debts as they fall due and appointment of a licensed insolvency practitioner as receiver is reasonably necessary and just and equitable; John Marshall Scutter is appointed receiver, trustees must not exercise development-related powers (those are to be exercised by the receiver), the receiver may borrow, engage consultants and agents, follow Companies/Receivership priority rules for creditors, be paid from trust assets, report within 12 months and seek Court leave if receivership extends beyond that period.
7 Mar 2022

AOKAUTERE LAND HOLDINGS LIMITED v TURVEY [2022] NZHC 375

Citation

[2022] NZHC 375
Court

High Court

An interim injunction restraining the defendant from appointing a receiver or exercising mortgagee power of sale was appropriate where the plaintiff had paid the assessed balance of the assigned loan, sought transfer under ss 102-103 Property Law Act 2007, and the defendant consented; the orders preserve the status quo pending substantive determination, with leave reserved for variation.
14 Jan 2022

TELLEN SYSTEMS NZ (2013) LTD v FIBRE INVESTMENTS LTD [2022] NZHC 19

Citation

[2022] NZHC 19
Court

High Court

The Court concluded there are serious questions to be tried on the disputed debt, s114 non‑compliance, s110 sale process and s25 good faith; urgency for pre‑commencement relief was established and the balance of convenience and overall justice favoured preserving the company's assets pending litigation, therefore an interim injunction restraining any sale was granted subject to filing a statement of claim by 28 January 2022.
7 Dec 2021

STRATFORD v MOSES [2021] NZHC 3337

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3337
Court

High Court

The application for a priority fixture and urgent appointment of a receiver was declined because the applicant failed to present strong exceptional evidence of imminent risk or asset dissipation; an independent trustee had been appointed and undertakings and notices of claim provided adequate protection; the matter was not sufficiently prepared and urgency was inappropriately sought after delay.
22 Nov 2021

ARMANI v ARMANI [2021] NZHC 3145

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3145
Court

High Court

Applicant had standing as an interested person but the court declined to appoint a receiver because appointment was not shown to be reasonably necessary under s138 of the Trusts Act nor required under the inherent jurisdiction: perceived mismanagement had been substantially addressed, Westpac indicated refinance could be considered on commercial terms, alternative remedies existed, the assets were not in imminent peril, and the costs and intrusiveness of receivership were not justified on the evidence before the court.
1 Nov 2021

MCVEIGH v DECMIL & ORS [2021] NZHC 2929

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2929
Court

High Court

The court concluded the consent order created an express trust for retention creditors and that, on the evidence, the applicant's earlier conduct (treating the funds as company property, depletion of the fund, incurring fees without clear court authorisation) together with undisclosed commercial arrangements with DAP gave rise to a real and reasonable appearance of conflict and potential lack of independence; accordingly the applicant was disqualified from appointment as receiver and the court appointed independent receivers (Gareth Hoole and Clive Bush) with powers under the Receiverships Ac…
17 Dec 2020

CLARKSON v CLARKSON [2020] NZHC 3382

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3382
Court

High Court

Given the ongoing dispute endangering the Trust's principal asset, the existence of detailed court directions winding up the Trust, the ability of a receiver to obtain insurance and operate under statutory duties to obtain the best price and act in good faith, and the impracticality of appointing a replacement independent trustee, the court removed Mr Meltzer as independent trustee and appointed him receiver to facilitate sale and distribution; the court also declared that Hugh and Ian were validly appointed trustees in November 1992 on the balance of probabilities.