New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Director prohibition

Legal area

Court

18 Aug 2022

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v ARCHITECTURAL HARDWARE SOLUTIONS LTD (in liq) [2022] NZHC 2054

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2054
Court

High Court

Having reviewed the liquidator's detailed records, six‑monthly reports, the statutory framework (s 284 Companies Act 1993) and applicable authorities, the Court was satisfied the fees of $108,917.97 (ex GST) appropriately reflect the value of services rendered to the creditors and therefore approved that remuneration and disbursements of $6,030.04.
1 Aug 2022

OLLIVER v DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES [2022] NZHC 1873

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1873
Court

High Court

The Deputy Registrar, although a non-party, was entitled to costs under r 14.1 because he was the successful opponent to the application; the concerns had been raised with the applicant prior to the application; the claimed costs were reasonable and appropriately categorised on a 2B basis, so an award of $8,484.50 plus $110.00 disbursements is justified.
9 Dec 2016

BRAND v REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES [2016] NZHC 2983

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2983
Court

High Court

An appellant under s 370 of the Companies Act has no general entitlement to discovery; discovery on appeal is exceptional and will only be ordered where the statutory context or special circumstances justify it; no special circumstances justified discovery in this case and the interlocutory application was therefore declined.
21 Mar 2013

CHRISTOPHER HAMISH MOORE V TASMAN DAIRY PRODUCERS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) AND KIWI YOGHURT COMPANY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) HC AK CIV 2013-404-916

Citation

openlaw-a46ba386_3584_404a_99b9_239f5ec252a3.pdf
Court

High Court

Permission granted because Mr Moore was not a former director of the failed companies, Hauraki acquired the Piako trade mark and related assets on the face of it at market value as assessed by the liquidators, creditors were notified and did not oppose, and the risks to creditors can be managed under court supervision consistent with the purpose of the phoenix regime.

New Zealand Case Law

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v ARCHITECTURAL HARDWARE SOLUTIONS LTD (in liq) [2022] NZHC 2054

OLLIVER v DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES [2022] NZHC 1873

BRAND v REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES [2016] NZHC 2983

CHRISTOPHER HAMISH MOORE V TASMAN DAIRY PRODUCERS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) AND KIWI YOGHURT COMPANY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) HC AK CIV 2013-404-916