New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Liquidation appointment

Legal area

Court

2 Feb 2017

BERGHUIS v BERGHUIS [2017] NZHC 68

Citation

[2017] NZHC 68
Court

High Court

The Court found the applicant, as a shareholder, had standing and established that the company's affairs were being conducted in a manner unjustly detrimental to her (unpaid rates, no rental accounting, no meetings, risk of dissipation of equity); attempts to resolve had failed and it was just and equitable under s 174 to put the company into liquidation and appoint the consenting practitioner David Petterson as liquidator.
23 Nov 2006

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE V HERMES CONSULTING LIMITED HC WN CIV-2006-485-2071

Citation

openlaw-78ace8f3_4c71_4fa4_ae99_df965affa2ae.pdf
Court

High Court

Because s282 requires that a proposed liquidator's written consent must exist prior to the passing of the shareholders' resolution, and Mr Archibald's consent did not exist prior to the resolution (it was dated and timed identically), his purported appointment was of no effect; consequently the court's prior appointment of Jordan and Vance on 6 November 2006 stands and a declaration was made that Archibald was not validly appointed.