New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Voidable preferences

Legal area

Court

4 Dec 2014

FORTUNE MILE INTERNATIONAL LTD v JUDGE [2014] NZHC 3146

Citation

[2014] NZHC 3146
Court

High Court

The interim freezing and restraining orders were discharged because the plaintiffs failed to establish the necessary real risk of dissipation beyond ordinary course trading (and did not establish insolvency on the material before the Court), the payments in issue fell within the ordinary course business exception in r 32.6(3), and on overall justice intervention would unduly risk the company's future; defendants entitled to costs.
10 Apr 2013

PETTERSON AS LIQUIDATOR OF HURLSTONE EARTHMOVING LIMITED V ALLIED CONCRETE LIMITED HC AK CIV-2012-404-006612

Citation

openlaw-989475e6_0a65_4cb4_b354_20580d65fca1.pdf
Court

High Court

Both respondents proved they acted in subjective good faith when receiving payments but failed to show that a reasonable person in their position would not have suspected that HEL was or would become insolvent and failed to establish that they gave value at the time the payments were received; accordingly the payments were voidable and the liquidator's applications to set them aside succeed.
25 Jun 2012

LEVIN & ORS V LAWRENCE & ORS HC AK CIV-2012-404-0956

Citation

openlaw-b2990f39_0f27_4443_974c_b2c4040d13df.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court dismissed the application because the respondents had deposed to a full and reasonable investigation showing no assets or voidable transactions; the statutory presumption against creditor access under s256(1)(a)(ii) requires a good reason to order inspection and the applicants did not establish any such reason or an arguable basis to reopen the liquidation.
30 Jul 2010

OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE V PETRICEVIC HC AK CIV-2009-404-006004

Citation

openlaw-2d281d42_e682_43b8_ab69_868a0ee5fc78.pdf
Court

High Court

Section 444(3) must be read so that antecedent transactions completed before commencement of the 2006 Act are only cancellable under the 2006 Act if they are the type of transaction that ultimately would have been set aside under the 1967 Act (i.e. beyond the provisional effect of a s 58(1) notice, surviving any s 86 process or expiry and obtaining required court orders); s 444(3) does not apply to ss 211 and 212, but ss 211 and 212 have limited retrospective effect only to the extent they align with comparable provisions in the 1967 Act (eg s 54(3) or other similar provisions)
1 Jun 2006

PORTER HIRE LIMITED V BLANCHETT AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2005-404-3056

Citation

openlaw-e90a40fd_106c_4c97_bb71_eb2474b57883.pdf
Court

High Court

Measured against the actual liquidation, the Court found the four $24,000 payments were part of the existing unusual but ongoing trading pattern and therefore in the ordinary course and not voidable; payments made directly by Manson were payments on behalf of Yukich, were not in the ordinary course and were voidable preferences; Porter Hire could not establish the s296(3) defence for the Manson payments because it failed to prove a reasonable belief in the transaction's validity; substituted-security argument on the machinery sale was not permitted to be advanced late and, on the evidence, Po…
30 Jun 2004

OORSCHOT V DANFOSS (NZ) LTD CA CA209/03

Citation

openlaw-d8c3bead_bc34_4738_b079_cb6aba88762f.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed because the payments did not operate to satisfy or reduce Danfoss's pre-receivership debt and, in any event, payments made by receivers pursuant to contracts entered into in the exercise of their powers are within the ordinary course of business and not voidable under s292; applying s292 to such receiver payments would frustrate the statutory and commercial scheme established by the Companies Act and Receiverships Act.

New Zealand Case Law

FORTUNE MILE INTERNATIONAL LTD v JUDGE [2014] NZHC 3146

PETTERSON AS LIQUIDATOR OF HURLSTONE EARTHMOVING LIMITED V ALLIED CONCRETE LIMITED HC AK CIV-2012-404-006612

LEVIN & ORS V LAWRENCE & ORS HC AK CIV-2012-404-0956

OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE V PETRICEVIC HC AK CIV-2009-404-006004

PORTER HIRE LIMITED V BLANCHETT AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2005-404-3056

OORSCHOT V DANFOSS (NZ) LTD CA CA209/03