New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Ability to pay

Legal area

Court

23 Mar 2021

KEMPSON v NZ POLICE [2021] NZHC 716

Citation

[2021] NZHC 716
Court

High Court

The District Court's order of $25,000 payable at $20 per week was manifestly excessive because it would have taken over 24 years to satisfy, imposing undue hardship given the offender's limited means and age; the High Court, having sufficient information on the appellant's means, quashed the $25,000 order and substituted a reparation order of $3,000 payable at $20 per week (approx three years), rather than remitting for a report, as substitution was an appropriate exercise of appellate discretion under s251 and proportionate to the offender's capacity to pay.
28 Aug 2020

TAILORED BUILDING SOLUTIONS LTD v EVANS [2020] NZHC 2208

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2208
Court

High Court

TBS satisfied statutory prerequisites for adjudication and the Evans debtors failed to establish, with clear and persuasive evidence, either a credible counterclaim/set-off that would defeat enforcement or current ability to pay the judgment immediately or within a reasonable time; accordingly the Court declined to exercise its s37 discretion to refuse adjudication on the basis of the asserted counterclaims but reserved final adjudication pending payment by specified date.
10 Oct 2019

YSB GROUP LTD v WORKSAFE NZ [2019] NZHC 2570

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2570
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed because the sentencing judge correctly applied the Stumpmaster methodology and culpability assessment, made an appropriate starting point and sufficiently considered YSB's financial position when reducing the provisional fine to $100,000; evidence showed the company had funds and planned distributions indicating ability to pay, and the costs award under s152 was justified.
13 Sept 2017

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v FAGAN [2017] NZHC 2214

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2214
Court

High Court

The Commissioner satisfied s13; Mr Fagan is presently unable to pay and his asserted sources of funds are speculative and not demonstrably imminent; his prior default and criminal history do not justify withholding adjudication; exercising the s37 discretion, the court adjudicated the debtor bankrupt.
11 Jul 2017

SZEKELY v NORTH [2017] NZCA 295

Citation

[2017] NZCA 295
Court

Court of Appeal

Registrar's decision confirmed because the affidavit relied upon was irrelevant to the fee refund application, the appellant was assessed as having sufficient income to pay the filing fee, and the appeal did not constitute a matter of genuine public interest under reg 5(4).
17 Apr 2015

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v ANDREWS [2015] NZHC 745

Citation

[2015] 3 NZLR 515
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed: the High Court held the Tribunal was entitled to revisit and depart from its prior costs approach given the Tribunal's broad statutory discretion, the human rights character of its jurisdiction, and relevant considerations including the claimant's vulnerability and means; the Tribunal did not commit an error of law or principle and its discretionary refusal to award costs was not plainly wrong.
19 Feb 2015

SYNNOTT v WOOD [2015] NZHC 217

Citation

[2015] NZHC 217
Court

High Court

The Court exercised its discretion to adjudicate the debtor bankrupt because the statutory requirements of s13 were established and the debtor failed to demonstrate an ability to pay the judgment debt within a reasonable time; asserted cross-claims and alleged solicitor conflict did not make adjudication unjust or inequitable and did not justify halting the application.
22 Aug 2014

Re Mawhinney [2014] NZHC 1999

Citation

[2014] NZHC 1999
Court

High Court

The Court allowed the review because the applicant's affidavit, accepted on rehearing, established he was wholly dependent on New Zealand Superannuation and that the Trust's only asset was the disputed tax debt; those facts satisfied the inability to pay criteria in the High Court Fees Regulations so the fee waiver was justified.
30 May 2014

PRATT & WHITNEY HOLDINGS SAS v GAPUZAN [2014] NZHC 1195

Citation

[2014] NZHC 1195
Court

High Court

The creditor established that a sealed District Court judgment existed, a bankruptcy notice was served, the debtor failed to pay by the statutory date constituting an act of bankruptcy, the debtor's grounds did not justify refusal in the Court's discretion, service objections were waived by the debtor's participation, and therefore the Court adjudicated the debtor bankrupt and awarded costs to the creditor on a 2B basis.
12 Mar 2013

BRUCE JAMES GILLESPIE, PRUDENCE JULIET GILLESPIE, CHRISTOPHER JAMES GILLESPIE, NICHOLAS JOHN GILLESPIE AND JONATHAN PAUL GILLESPIE V ANDREW JOHN DEXTER GUEST HC AK CIV-2011-404-001629

Citation

openlaw-32137584_f846_485f_9365_2554e9b80592.pdf
Court

High Court

Applicant failed to establish reason to believe Mr Guest would be unable to meet an adverse costs award; evidence showed Mr Guest receives a substantial income, was supported by bank managers' affidavits (albeit given reduced weight where conflicting), and the likelihood of bankruptcy was small; therefore ordering security for costs was not just and application was dismissed.