New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Asset valuation

Legal area

Court

10 Mar 2021

DYER v GARDINER [2021] NZCA 58

Citation

[2021] NZCA 58
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court directed precise quantifications: $23,480 plus Judicature Act interest yielding $42,264 for the 2000 share disposition, $124,924.92 for the increase in AAC/CIP shares, and $8,088.45 for the current account, but held the total payable under s 44C(2)(a) is statutorily capped and ordered payment of $192,850 as the compensation under s 44C(2)(a); no post-judgment interest or further costs were awarded and leave is required for any further directions application.
26 Jun 2020

HEWSON v DEANS [2020] NZHC 1465

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1465
Court

High Court

Appeal allowed in part: the High Court held a proportion of the unpaid overseas income tax was relationship debt to the extent that income was shown to have been paid into relationship accounts (tax attributable to 64% of 2016 income and 48% of 2017 income — relationship debt $25,323.64); the unequal 60/40 division of the family home was unjustified and the home is to be shared equally; Family Court findings on student loan repayments, lump sum child support, post-separation compensation and vehicle valuation were upheld except as to tax classification and s13 division.
26 Feb 2019

COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v CHESTERFIELDS PRESCHOOLS LIMITED (in interim liquidation) [2019] NZHC 272

Citation

[2019] NZHC 272
Court

High Court

The Court accepted the Commissioner's recalculations (including correction for the 1 December 2007 GST credit), the application of the Court of Appeal's 15% across‑the‑board remission and the administrative decision to stop accrual of penalties and UOMI after July 2008; those calculations established an admitted/established debt of $1,400,566.15 (tax/penalties/interest $1,088,461.15; costs $32,105; loan $280,000) and contingent claims of $307,389.01, and on the cashflow and balance‑sheet analysis CPL cannot meet its debts as they fall due, so the Court ordered CPL wound up and appointed liqui…
9 Nov 2018

LAM & ORS v MO & ORS [2018] NZHC 2920

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2920
Court

High Court

In the absence of cogent contrary evidence the court will accept the independent account-taker's factual assessments regarding reasonable expenses and salaries; where companies functioned effectively as instruments of the director the director must bear the lion's share of litigation costs; losses incurred by the company undertaking construction (Plimmerton) are losses of the joint venture; prior judicial directions (including payment of account-taker fees by Sunlink) stand unless and until the substantive judgment is recalled.
25 Jul 2018

HAYES v OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE [2018] NZHC 1858

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1858
Court

High Court

Refusal to seize the buses was within the range of reasonable responses by the Official Assignee because the supplied valuation was unreliable, independent valuations indicated low recoverable value, ownership was contested and recovery was likely uneconomic; even if breach occurred it was unlikely sale would have produced a surplus to pay the plaintiff and the plaintiff failed to mitigate, therefore the claim is dismissed.
21 Aug 2013

F v D [2013] NZHC 2132

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2132
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was dismissed because there are genuine and material factual disputes about what assets were transferred and their value (particularly whether Taupo assets were included and whether substantial assets were missing), which affect whether the defendant is liable to pay the full $81,500; accordingly further factual investigation and proceedings are required. The defendant was granted leave to amend her notice of opposition as there was no prejudice to the plaintiff.

New Zealand Case Law

DYER v GARDINER [2021] NZCA 58

HEWSON v DEANS [2020] NZHC 1465

COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v CHESTERFIELDS PRESCHOOLS LIMITED (in interim liquidation) [2019] NZHC 272

LAM & ORS v MO & ORS [2018] NZHC 2920

HAYES v OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE [2018] NZHC 1858

F v D [2013] NZHC 2132