New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Without-notice relief

Legal area

Court

27 Oct 2023

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v WHEELER [2023] NZHC 3013

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3013
Court

High Court

On the affidavit material the Court was satisfied there were reasonable grounds to believe substantial cash rental payments and building improvements to 18A Tanner Street were funded by proceeds of significant criminal activity linked to the Tribesmen Motorcycle Club, that those funds directly or indirectly serviced the mortgage and tainted the property, and that there was a real risk of disposal if notice were given; accordingly a without‑notice interim restraining order was granted placing the property in the custody and control of the Official Assignee.
21 Sept 2023

NEIMAN, of Wellington, Company Director v [2023] NZHC 2633

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2633
Court

High Court

The Court granted interim letters of administration to Michael John Markham under Administration Act 1969 s 6(2) because special circumstances existed—principally the need to preserve and properly manage multiple trading companies controlled by the deceased, the applicant's relevant knowledge and consent of the surviving spouse—and because the grant was limited in scope and time, thereby protecting the interests of those entitled; a competency assessment and security were not required on the facts and the without-notice procedure was justified.
16 Dec 2022

RE GO TO COLLECTION LIMITED [2022] NZHC 3471

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3471
Court

High Court

A short one‑month extension of the convening period and corresponding extension of the s239Y termination notice period was justified because it advanced the statutory objects of voluntary administration by preserving prospects of sale as going concerns and a potential DOCA, avoided likely prejudice from holiday unavailability, the company could meet its obligations during the period, the extension was limited in duration and unlikely to prejudice creditors, and dispensing with personal service was proportionate given notification directions.
14 May 2021

SETTLERS HONEY LIMITED v FIRST HONEY NZ LIMITED [2021] NZHC 1086

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1086
Court

High Court

The Court granted a freezing order because the applicant demonstrated a good arguable case on constructive trust and money had and received, the respondent held identifiable bank assets, and there was a real risk of dissipation (distinct from payment of valid debts) given the arrangement that diverted payment to the respondent and its failure to account; consequently interim freezing and ancillary disclosure orders without notice were appropriate and limited to 21 May 2021.
24 Feb 2021

HUANG & LU v MATAKANA WINES LTD & WAIHOPAI VALLEY VINEYARD LIMITED [2021] NZHC 348

Citation

[2021] NZHC 348
Court

High Court

On the material and circumstantial evidence the plaintiffs established a good arguable case that Waihopai (and related persons) received and dealt with the plaintiffs' funds, there were identifiable assets or proceeds to which orders could attach, and there was a real risk of dissipation given rapid transfers to directors/related parties and lack of satisfactory explanation; accordingly interim freezing and ancillary orders (including against third parties and a limited passport surrender and disclosure) were appropriate and justified pending trial.
17 Oct 2019

Drikolor New Zealand Limited [Originating application Without Notice] [2019] NZHC [2650]

Citation

Drikolor New Zealand Limited [Originating application Without Notice] [2019] NZHC [2650]
Court

High Court

The Court granted leave under s286(4) because there was no actual conflict: the applicants had not acted for Drikolor and prior services to ASB were unrelated to Drikolor, the urgency of Drikolor's position justified a without‑notice order, and creditors' interests were adequately protected by procedural directions including notice, leave to apply to set aside, and treating the applicants' costs as an administration expense.
8 Oct 2019

RE KUMFS GROUP LTD [2019] NZHC 2552

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2552
Court

High Court

The court granted the without‑notice application and extended both the convening period and the s239Y termination notice period because the administrators demonstrated that additional time (108 days to 31 January 2020) was necessary to investigate sale and restructuring options and prepare an informed report to creditors, and the extensions would not unduly prejudice creditors while remaining consistent with the purpose of voluntary administration.
20 Sept 2019

In the Matter of PETER JOHN CRAIG [2019] NZHC 2386

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2386
Court

High Court

The Court approved the ten‑year postponement under s64A because the variation was in the best interests of the potential minor beneficiaries, avoided penal tax consequences from a deemed distribution, had the consent of adult beneficiaries, did not unfairly conflict with the settlor's intent given unforeseen zoning/tax circumstances, and there was no prejudice from granting relief without notice or appointing litigation guardians.
26 Jul 2019

SMITH MITCHELL LTD v BRADLEY [2019] NZHC 1791

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1791
Court

High Court

Given the evidence of systematic diversion of client funds, the presence of identifiable New Zealand assets, the inferred real risk of dissipation based on alleged prolonged dishonest conduct, and the provision of an undertaking as to damages, the balance of convenience favoured granting a without‑notice freezing order and substituted service to preserve assets pending further hearing.
6 Dec 2018

SERVCORP LTD v PILLAY [2018] NZHC 3208

Citation

[2018] NZHC 3208
Court

High Court

Where an applicant proves a good arguable case, identifiable assets in jurisdiction and a real risk of dissipation, the Court may grant without‑notice freezing and ancillary disclosure orders; those conditions were satisfied on the evidence of alleged fraudulent transfers by the respondent and orders were justified to preserve assets and obtain information.