3 Mar 2023
Plaintiff demonstrated a good arguable case of conversion of jointly owned insurance proceeds, presented evidence of dissipation and lack of access that created a real risk assets would be further dissipated; on balance of convenience a without‑notice freezing order limited to the defendant's bank account was justified to preserve assets until the next chambers hearing.
8 Mar 2022
The Court granted the without-notice freezing order because the plaintiff established a good arguable case of covert invoicing and breach of employment duties involving just over NZD 440,000, identified assets to which the order could apply, and a real risk of dissipation given the defendants' conduct and overseas connections; the balance of justice favored preserving assets pending further hearing.
23 Feb 2022
The Court held there is a serious question to be tried that KPBL is entitled, under s 122(5) RMA and by necessary implication from the consent and surrounding material, to exclude others from specified active marina construction areas in the CMA to the extent reasonably necessary to implement the coastal permit. On balance of convenience and overall justice (including safety and adequacy of damages), an interim injunction should be maintained but limited: it applies only to demarcated staged construction areas in the CMA while construction is occurring and must be varied to avoid landward ext…
9 Feb 2022
The application was declined because the applicant failed to demonstrate a good arguable case for the alleged oral contract or the asserted $20,000,000 profits, did not plead any cause of action against the second to fourth defendants, and produced no evidence of a real risk of dissipation of the property or bank accounts; accordingly freezing orders without notice were not justified.
5 Sept 2019
The Court found the plaintiff had a strongly arguable case that the material was confidential and that the balance of convenience favoured preserving the status quo; accordingly an interim injunction and suppression of the confidential material were granted pending further order, with liberty for defendants to apply to set aside on 24‑hour notice and the matter listed for mention; costs reserved.
21 Dec 2018
Because the respondents had listed the property for sale, relevant accounting information as to amounts owing under the mortgage was not provided, there was an apparent breach of undertakings to the Official Assignee, and the first applicant occupied the property on home detention making damages an inadequate remedy, the balance of convenience required preservation of the status quo by granting a limited interim injunction restraining any steps to sell, transfer or dispose of the property until 4 February 2019 or further order, subject to undertakings as to damages.
7 Dec 2016
The without‑notice orders of 9 November 2016 were discharged because the plaintiffs' application contained materially inadequate and misleading information and they had come to the Court without clean hands; having received further confidential financial information the Court accepted the defendants' case that urgent capital was required and therefore rescinded the without‑notice restraint but left substantive rights and potential relief to be determined in the main proceeding.
19 Dec 2014
A without‑notice freezing order limited to the two identified properties was justified because the plaintiff in liquidation demonstrated a good arguable claim against the defendant and a real risk of dissipation evidenced by active marketing of property and the registration of large second mortgages by the defendant's directors; the order was limited to protect the first mortgagee and to permit legitimate transactions, and disclosure by the defendant's directors was required to inform ongoing protection of creditors.
4 Jun 2009
The Court declined to grant a without‑notice injunction because a plausible explanation (a broadcast error) existed and the defendant offered clear undertakings which addressed the substantive grievance; accordingly the application was dismissed on the basis of those undertakings and no costs were awarded.