20 Nov 2023
Application dismissed because the debtor did not establish a genuine, triable cross-claim equal to or greater than the judgment debt; his asserted intention to raise funds or obtain refunds in future does not satisfy the statutory requirements to set aside a bankruptcy notice under the Insolvency Act and relevant authorities.
31 Jul 2023
Debtor failed to discharge the onus under s37 to show adjudication should be refused: there is prima facie entitlement to adjudication (judgment debt and served bankruptcy notice), and the unsatisfactory explanations and evidence of potential asset disposals and unexplained proceeds justify Official Assignee investigation; debtor's health and circumstances do not outweigh the need for investigation, so the court will not refuse adjudication and the matter is to be listed for bankruptcy proceedings.
11 May 2023
Restraining orders under the CPRA do not, as a matter of construction and sensible interaction between statutes, operate as an implied stay of execution for the purposes of s17 of the Insolvency Act 2006; a debtor must seek variation under the CPRA where necessary. The appellant failed to show he had no other assets and failed to establish a genuine triable cross-claim, so adjudication as bankrupt was properly made and confirmed on appeal.
7 Nov 2022
The statutory grounds for adjudication were established by the debtor's non‑compliance with the bankruptcy notice and commission of an act of bankruptcy; the Court declined to exercise its s37 discretion to refuse adjudication because the debtor's challenges to the underlying consent judgment had been rejected by the Family Court and no new matter justified further adjournment, therefore an order adjudicating the debtor bankrupt under s36 was made.
20 Oct 2022
The Court found s 13 requirements satisfied, declined to look behind the District Court judgment because it was decided on the merits and not appealed, held the defendant remained personally liable because the payment was not received merely as an agent and was received with notice of irregularity, and exercised its discretion to adjudicate the defendant bankrupt; public interest in recovery and potential asset investigation supported the order.
5 Aug 2022
The requirements of s13 were established and the debtor failed to discharge the onus under s37 to show adjudication should be refused: the proposed challenge to the underlying judgment is unpersuasive and out of time, impecuniosity alone does not make adjudication pointless, public interest in accountability supports adjudication, and asset recovery issues are for the Official Assignee to investigate; accordingly the court adjudicated the debtor bankrupt.
29 Jul 2022
The Court found Carters satisfied the statutory prima facie requirements under s13 (debt, act of bankruptcy, certainty and payable). Section 42 did not apply because the judgment on the guarantee was not under appeal. Balancing the discretionary factors under ss37/38, the Court concluded the debtor had shown a bona fide, potentially meritorious course (possible civil claim against Tauranga City Council supported by reports) and that a short, conditional halt would not operate unjustly on Carters; accordingly the application for adjudication was halted for a limited period (four months) with d…
29 Apr 2022
Service of the bankruptcy notice was proved; non-payment of the $828 costs would have been an act of bankruptcy but because the applicant could not establish that the debtor owed at least $1,000 as at the date of adjudication (the debtor paid the sums claimed before the hearing) and because a supporting creditor who has merely filed a notice does not count as having 'joined' the application under s 13(a), the Court was unable to make an order adjudicating the debtor bankrupt; accordingly the application was dismissed.
30 Mar 2022
The s13 jurisdictional requirements were satisfied (a certain, immediately payable debt of $16,333.87; failure to comply with the bankruptcy notice within the statutory period constituted an act of bankruptcy), and the debtor failed to adduce credible evidence of solvency or any sufficient reason to exercise the Court's discretion under ss36–37 to refuse adjudication; therefore the Court adjudicated the debtor bankrupt.
28 Feb 2022
The s 13 statutory requirements were satisfied: the debt is certain and payable, the act of bankruptcy occurred and the creditor's application was filed within three months after the period was extended under r 24.10; there were no active appeals that prevented adjudication; the defendant failed to adduce credible evidence of set-off or sufficient grounds to exercise the broad discretion under s 37 to refuse adjudication; therefore the defendant is adjudicated bankrupt.