New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Gst liability

Legal area

Court

28 Aug 2020

Alala International Limited (in liquidation) v Chen [2020] NZHC 2212

Citation

Alala International Limited (in liquidation) v Chen [2020] NZHC 2212
Court

High Court

The court found the director breached ss 131, 135 and 137 by dissipating the company's funds (opening balance and net proceeds of property sale) while the company was insolvent or approaching insolvency, failed to keep adequate accounting records contrary to s 194, and that those breaches causally resulted in the company's inability to meet GST and other creditor claims; accordingly the court ordered full compensatory relief under s 301 in the amount of NZD 580,248.24 together with interest and ordered NZD 10,000 under s 300 for additional liquidation costs.
29 Nov 2018

GIBSON & OR v OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE & ORS [2018] NZHC 3129

Citation

[2018] NZHC 3129
Court

High Court

The court found both parties obtained some benefit from the interlocutory process, identified a lack of constructive communication between them, and exercised its discretion to refuse both parties' costs applications so that costs lie where they fall; the limited stay of enforcement previously ordered was appropriate to prevent irreversible prejudice though narrower than that sought by the Official Assignee.
16 Oct 2017

D C RODEE TRADING AS MATAHUI AVOCADO RESORT SPA v FRESHMAX NZ LIMITED [2017] NZHC 2522

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2522
Court

High Court

The statement of claim disclosed no reasonably arguable cause of action because alleged oral variations to a written contract were vague, speculative and unsupported by acceptable evidence; Freshmax provided adequate documentary and evidential support showing it performed its contractual obligations and paid the plaintiff the amounts due, and the plaintiff conceded GST liability which undermined his case; accordingly the claim was struck out and, alternatively, summary judgment would have been entered for Freshmax.
4 May 2016

THE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD v BROWN & ORS [2016] NZHC 882

Citation

[2016] NZHC 882
Court

High Court

Because the co‑owners (Childs and Gillett) made no claim and Ms Brown's equitable claim based on her $225,000 cash contribution was compelling, the Court ordered the net proceeds (after secured creditor repayment and the IRD demand) be paid to Ms Brown's solicitors and allowed the Bank's interpleader/discharge.
16 Dec 2015

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v CIT HOLDINGS LIMITED [2015] NZHC 3207 [16 December 2015]

Citation

[2015] NZHC 3207
Court

High Court

Leave to file a statement of defence was refused because service was properly effected at the recorded registered office, CIT failed to demonstrate procedural impropriety by the Commissioner in the disputes process or an arguable defence undermining the assessment, CIT had previously acknowledged tax shortfalls and provided voluntary disclosure, the belated PWC opinion was uninformative and too late, and CIT did not show lack of prejudice to the Commissioner or evidence of solvency to justify indulgence.
15 Aug 2014

DAVID STUART VANCE AND COLIN DAVID OWENS v NEVILLE WARREN JEFFERYS [2014] NZHC 1932

Citation

[2014] NZHC 1932
Court

High Court

Summary judgment refused. Although liquidators proved on the evidence that the director lacked reasonable grounds to believe Brooklyn could meet its GST liabilities when incurring the obligations, there remained substantive factual questions (extent and timing of cost overruns, the quantum of the GST shortfall, and an arguable case that Spinnaker acted as a shadow director). Those questions affect causation and culpability and make assessment of compensation inappropriate at summary judgment stage.
6 Jun 2014

SATUIT PROPERTIES LIMITED v THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2014] NZHC 1300

Citation

[2014] NZHC 1300
Court

High Court

Section 109 of the Tax Administration Act 1994 precluded the defendant from disputing the GST assessment in this Court absent proper objection or challenge, so the defendant had no arguable defence to the liquidation claim; consequently the extension of time was refused, the statement of defence struck out and a liquidation order was made.
31 Oct 2013

ENGINEERONLINE LIMITED v COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2013] NZHC 2879

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2879
Court

High Court

The court refused leave for the non‑lawyer director to represent the company because no exceptional circumstances justified departing from the Mannix rule; however, the court exercised its discretion to waive security for costs given the company's limited finances, the burden of obtaining counsel, and the director's personal undertaking to meet any costs order against the company.
30 Mar 2012

SIMPSON AND DOWNES AS RECEIVERS OF CAPITAL + MERCHANT INVESTMENTS LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP) V COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE COA CA361/2011

Citation

COA CA361/2011
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that GST received on mortgagee sales is an expense of sale under ss5(2) and 17 of the GST Act and s185 of the Property Law Act and therefore must be paid to the Commissioner rather than to the secured creditor; the appointment of receivers does not alter that statutory priority and, in exercise of s34 receivership supervisory powers, the Court directed the receivers to pay the GST they received to the Commissioner (while not finally determining any separate personal liability under s58).
23 Feb 2012

COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE V JP GOLLAN AS TRUSTEE IN THE GOLLAN FAMILY TRUST HC HAM CIV 2011-419-84

Citation

openlaw-a8e1fc4c_6781_455c_9c8c_505728632108.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court found the jurisdictional requirements under Insolvency Act ss13 and 36 were met and the debtor failed to establish grounds under s37 to refuse adjudication: the debt is admitted and unpaid, the debtor is again trustee of the liable trust, disclosure is incomplete, and the trading of assets and speculative funding justify Official Assignee supervision. Consequently the Court adjourned to allow the debtor to pay the undertaken sums but indicated that, absent payment, adjudication would likely be made on 19 March 2012.