New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interim charging order

Legal area

Court

9 May 2023

WANG v GUANGZHOU DONGJIANG PETROLEUM SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD [2023] NZHC 1087

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1087
Court

High Court

The beneficial interest in the One Pure 25% shareholding remains with Mr Kang because clause 12 of the shareholders agreement does not automatically effect a transfer of beneficial ownership without provision for consideration or a proper transfer mechanism; clause 12 required a transfer notice in accordance with the company constitution (which does not exist) and contemplated purchase or liquidation mechanisms, so the interim charging order should not be varied to exclude the One Pure shareholding.
17 Jan 2022

LAWTON v REDEMPTECH HOLDINGS PTE LIMITED [2022] NZHC 21

Citation

[2022] NZHC 21
Court

High Court

Application dismissed because: (1) RESP loan principal was not payable (repayment contingent on PLG funding) and interest was not due or accruing absent a demand, so interest could not be charged; (2) RTL had earlier validly demanded repayment of USD34m creating a present right of set-off that extinguished or took priority over any receivables or monthly income payable to RHL, preventing effective charging; (3) the security registration relied on concerned RTL's interest not RHL's and did not constitute a breach attracting directors' personal liability; and (4) directors' alleged loan indebte…
20 Jul 2011

MONCRIEFF PASTORAL LIMITED V SHIRLEEN SHIA LING SIM HC AK CIV 2004-404-5603

Citation

openlaw-4fd7135e_5d88_4e46_bf46_7207b5f580ed.pdf
Court

High Court

The interim charging order was properly made and remains in force because the plaintiff is entitled to secure payment of its sealed, final judgments; the defendant's attempts to discharge the order and relitigate those judgments are futile and are dismissed, and the Registrar is directed to refuse filings that seek to re-open those final judgments.
23 Feb 2011

SS DUGH V JR DUGH, PK DUGH AND NK DUGH HC NAP CIV-2010-441-651

Citation

openlaw-9b97948b_d984_4151_a64f_bf54746bcc58.pdf
Court

High Court

Because an interim charging order in favour of Wine Country Credit Union charged the judgment sum, r17.55 prohibited payment of that sum to the judgment creditor; accordingly bankruptcy notices requiring payment were premature and were set aside.
12 Aug 2010

TOKLEY V ROBINSON AND ANOR HC HAM CIV-2009-419-136

Citation

openlaw-a94e287b_79cb_4d40_8286_a58d2e020679.pdf
Court

High Court

Because the proceeds were jointly owned by both defendants the second defendant indisputably had an interest in the monies; the High Court therefore had jurisdiction to make an interim charging order against that interest and the order did not prejudice the first defendant since it only charged the second defendant's interest and any change in entitlement ordered by the Family Court would determine the charged proportion.
27 Oct 2009

JACK AND ANOR V CARVER AND ORS HC AK CIV 2008-404-005910

Citation

openlaw-dfabf69c_6302_47e7_bfb6_12b88d36d1b7.pdf
Court

High Court

Because the judgment had been sealed, the court had jurisdiction under r 17.59 to make a final charging order; the variation sought merely reduced the charge to the amount of the sealed judgment; and Venning J's condition that net proceeds be held by an independent stakeholder provided sufficient protection to defendants, the court granted the variation and made the charging order final.

New Zealand Case Law

WANG v GUANGZHOU DONGJIANG PETROLEUM SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD [2023] NZHC 1087

LAWTON v REDEMPTECH HOLDINGS PTE LIMITED [2022] NZHC 21

MONCRIEFF PASTORAL LIMITED V SHIRLEEN SHIA LING SIM HC AK CIV 2004-404-5603

SS DUGH V JR DUGH, PK DUGH AND NK DUGH HC NAP CIV-2010-441-651

TOKLEY V ROBINSON AND ANOR HC HAM CIV-2009-419-136

JACK AND ANOR V CARVER AND ORS HC AK CIV 2008-404-005910