New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Genuine dispute

Legal area

Court

7 Jun 2023

ZENSCAPE LIMITED v COLLECTIVE CONTRACTORS LIMITED [2023] NZHC 1410

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1410
Court

High Court

The Court stayed the liquidation proceedings and restrained advertising because there is a genuine and substantial dispute about the invoices (notably charges for travel time, meal breaks and timesheet variances) that must be tested at trial; the parties had contractual payment provisions outside the CCA payment‑claim regime but that did not defeat the existence of the substantive dispute; Collective rebutted the insolvency presumption by evidence and deposit of the disputed sum into trust; and the creditor's pursuit via statutory demand and agents, given the communicated dispute, amounted to…
15 Aug 2022

STEELCRAFT STRUCTURAL LTD v A 2 Z NZ POWERCOM LTD [2022] NZHC 2017

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2017
Court

High Court

Powercom failed to serve a payment schedule to the s20 payment claim and did not comply with the s289 statutory demand, creating the statutory presumption of insolvency which it did not rebut because its financial statements were outdated; cross-claims and alleged defects could not defeat recovery under the CCA without a payment schedule, therefore the court adjourned to allow payment but will order liquidation if the debt is not paid by the stated date.
27 May 2022

BELLE MER PROPERTIES LTD v ECO-SMART GROUP LTD [2022] NZHC 1207

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1207
Court

High Court

The Court ordered a 50% uplift to scale 2B costs because ESG should not have invoked the statutory demand procedure: ESG knew or ought to have known the debt was disputed, the alleged debt was inextricable from substantive proceedings so statutory demand was inappropriate, ESG issued the demand rapidly after invoicing without prior informal demand or reasonable opportunity to address disputes, and ESG failed to resolve issues after applicant identified significant evidential problems, with the Court upholding two of the contested issues.
17 Aug 2021

SKYHORSE TRANSPORT LTD v GREENHILL HOME LTD [2021] NZHC 2182

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2182
Court

High Court

Greenhill established a prima facie genuine dispute on substantial grounds supported by contemporaneous excavation plans and tip dockets, deposited the disputed funds in its solicitor's trust account, and proposed prompt expert resolution; accordingly the Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to stay proceedings and restrain advertising on conditions that the funds remain in trust and the parties promptly resolve the dispute.
3 May 2021

BAKER v SEVEN SEAS LIMITED [2021] NZCA 150

Citation

[2021] NZCA 150
Court

Court of Appeal

Despite the minimal two-day delay and absence of prejudice, the Court declined the extension because the appeal had little or no prospect of success given that the respondent had paid the disputed sums and the Judge's conclusion that a genuine dispute existed was orthodox; the applicants' conduct and the circumstances made this an unusual case where refusal was warranted.
17 Mar 2020

BRIAN ROBERTS (1998) LIMITED v BASF NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2020] NZHC 537

Citation

[2020] NZHC 537
Court

High Court

The Court concluded that despite weak and partially uncorroborated evidence, BRL had raised a genuine dispute about whether BASF's Glasurit paint was of merchantable quality and whether BRL was liable for the liquidated damages claimed; therefore the statutory demand was set aside and the dispute must be determined at trial.
21 Nov 2017

INDE LEGACY LIMITED v S J DISTRIBUTORS LIMITED [2017] NZHC 2859

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2859
Court

High Court

The Court found a genuine dispute over the existence of the debt and that the respondent withdrew the statutory demand after being aware of the dispute; consequently the statutory demand was set aside and costs were awarded to the applicant on a 1B scale to reflect respondent's conduct and the proportionality of costs.
3 Oct 2014

COONEY TRUSTEES LIMITED v PIRAWAI EXCAVATION LIMITED [2014] NZHC 2435

Citation

[2014] NZHC 2435
Court

High Court

The statutory demand was reduced to $24,797.26 and set aside as to the balance because correspondence from the trustees' solicitors admitted the work was carried out for the Trust and that the trustees were liable for the reasonable cost, establishing respondent's entitlement to at least that sum; costs were ordered to lie where they fall because both parties had partial success and both had at times adopted entrenched positions in negotiations.
30 Nov 2011

WESTPARK MARINA LIMITED V AUTOMATED SOLUTIONS LIMITED HC AK CIV-2011-404-7295

Citation

openlaw-2c42297a_37dc_4f97_a32d_c889e9c5913a.pdf
Court

High Court

The statutory demand was set aside conditionally because the applicant established at least a prima facie genuine and substantial dispute about the goods and services supplied and offered to secure the disputed sum; the respondent had not complied with procedural obligations and the amount at stake was modest, so conditional relief requiring payment into court or agreed stakeholder security was appropriate.
13 Apr 2010

TRANSFORM MINERALS LIMITED V MCLEANS RURAL HOLDINGS LIMITED HC CHCH CIV 2010 409 260

Citation

openlaw-0b4bc4bb_64d3_4807_923e_53f7c61f5b61.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court found a genuine dispute existed as to the re-cladding and related works but not as to the workshop extension and snow repairs; exercised discretion to grant the application in part by ordering a partial payment of $8,222.86, directing remaining claimed funds to be held in defendant's solicitors' trust pending arbitration under the lease, and staying/ restraining the liquidation advertising and proceedings pending arbitration.