New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Ppsa interpretation

Legal area

Court

10 Aug 2011

GE BURNS AND RD AGNEW V THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE HC AK CIV-2010-404-7387

Citation

openlaw-28e175f2_13cf_429d_9258_c413a1430983.pdf
Court

High Court

The GST refund mistakenly paid post‑liquidation must be returned to the Commissioner under equitable principles (Re Condon); the statutory term "accounts receivable" as defined in the PPSA is broad and not limited to traditional 'book debts', and the collected funds (development contributions refund, bonds, solicitors' client funds and related amounts) constituted monetary obligations/accounts receivable or their proceeds at the date of liquidation, giving the Commissioner priority under s 312 and Schedule 7; liquidators' reasonable costs of gathering/preserving the collected funds and obtain…
23 May 2011

RABOBANK NEW ZEALAND LIMITED V ROBERT MCANULTY, SIR PATRICK HOGAN, RICHARD CHUNG YEE HUI, PETER HAK YUNG YIP, PETER EGAN, JAMES LIM, CARL HOLT (COLLECTIVELY THE "FEBRUARY SYNDICATE") COA CA617/2010

Citation

COA CA617/2010
Court

Court of Appeal

The bailment of the stallion was not a 'lease for a term of more than 1 year' under s16(1)(i) because the Syndicate was not in the business of leasing/bailing goods with intent to profit and the statutory exception for lessors not regularly engaged in the business applied; consequently the Syndicate's interest was not a security interest under the PPSA and Rabobank's PPSA priority argument failed. The Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the refusal of summary judgment on that basis.
6 Apr 2009

J S BROOKSBANK AND COMPANY (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED V EXFTX LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP AND LIQUIDATION) FORMERLY KNOWN AS FELTEX CARPETS LTD AND ANOR CA CA698/2007

Citation

openlaw-1c2cff85_b928_446e_bbbe_1eebf61bf3de.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that the brokers acted outside their authority so Feltex's possession was not voluntary and JSB could sue in conversion; the supply agreement did not, in substance, create a security interest under the PPSA and ANZ's perfected security had not attached to the wool, so PPSA priority did not defeat JSB's conversion claim; appeal allowed.
21 Dec 2006

HARVESTPRO LOGGING LIMITED V CORDYLINE HOLDINGS LIMITED HC AK CIV 2006-404-3107

Citation

openlaw-de4df55d_156d_4cca_8453_69517f2f7df1.pdf
Court

High Court

The application for a stay was declined because there was no evidential basis that withholding a stay would render the appeal nugatory or that a forced sale was inevitable; no clear evidence of injurious effect to the applicant outweighed the successful party's entitlement to the fruits of judgment, and the balance of convenience favoured refusal of the stay.

New Zealand Case Law

GE BURNS AND RD AGNEW V THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE HC AK CIV-2010-404-7387

RABOBANK NEW ZEALAND LIMITED V ROBERT MCANULTY, SIR PATRICK HOGAN, RICHARD CHUNG YEE HUI, PETER HAK YUNG YIP, PETER EGAN, JAMES LIM, CARL HOLT (COLLECTIVELY THE "FEBRUARY SYNDICATE") COA CA617/2010

J S BROOKSBANK AND COMPANY (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED V EXFTX LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP AND LIQUIDATION) FORMERLY KNOWN AS FELTEX CARPETS LTD AND ANOR CA CA698/2007

HARVESTPRO LOGGING LIMITED V CORDYLINE HOLDINGS LIMITED HC AK CIV 2006-404-3107