New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

New Zealand Case Law

Section 76 insolvency act 2006

  • 12 Apr 2018

    SHARROCK v WEDD [2018] NZHC 661

    Citation
    [2018] NZHC 661
    Court
    High Court

    The Court exercised its discretion under s 76(2) Insolvency Act 2006 to allow the proceeding to continue against the first defendant for the sole purpose of determining costs because the Official Assignee raised no objection and the first defendant had participated jointly with the second defendant in opposing summary judgment; the Court fixed costs against the first defendant on a 2B scale without uplift and ordered joint and several liability with the second defendant for $16,056 (costs) and $2,507.75 (disbursements).

  • 6 Mar 2013

    WALKER V FORBES & ORS HC CHCH CIV 2012-409-002486

    Citation
    openlaw-f3a0701f_69ab_45fa_b55c_9f2bea4e9fdb.pdf
    Court
    High Court

    Section 76(2) is limited to allowing proceedings that had already begun before adjudication to continue; it does not confer jurisdiction to commence fresh proceedings post-adjudication. On the facts, the proposed compensation claim against the bankrupt is a provable debt and leave to continue that claim under s 76(2) is declined. Declarations or prohibitory relief concerning directors' duties do not require leave. The Court granted time for submissions on the availability of s 237 as the appropriate statutory route to resolve disputed provable claims.