25 May 2023
Although the liquidator obtained the examinations (thus achieving the substantive outcome), neither party was meaningfully obstructive to a degree justifying a costs award; the presumption that defendants obtain costs on discontinuance was displaced as to the applicant, but there was no basis to award costs to either party, and it was just and equitable to let costs lie where they fall.
29 Oct 2013
A director of a New Zealand company falls within s 261(2)(a) of the Companies Act 1993 even if resident overseas and accordingly may be subject to orders under s 266; a New Zealand incorporated company served at its registered office is properly subject to the court's jurisdiction; the court set aside the tenth and eleventh respondents' appearances protesting jurisdiction.
19 Jun 2012
The court declined to revisit its s30 costs allocation and confirmed that costs remain apportioned as previously ordered (receivership fund to bear receivers' costs; fund available to preferential creditors to bear liquidator's costs), and it awarded interim costs to the liquidator on the s37 application against the receivers payable from the receivership fund on a 2B scale with reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar, with leave to seek an increase after review of documents produced under s261.
4 Apr 2012
The court held the emailed notice of failure was validly served because the Ferrier Hodgson email system was a designated information system (Electronic Transactions Act s11 and Model Law principles). The liquidator properly relied on s261(1) to request company books and records; the requested documents were company records (s194) and not solely receivers' working papers. The receivers failed to comply with the s261(1) notice. Section 262 permits receivers to retain documents necessary for the receivership but requires the liquidator to pay reasonable expenses for copies; the court ordered pr…
25 Feb 2011
The court held that the respondent’s knowledge of the nature and purpose of payments from Titan Building (HB) to his company constitutes knowledge of the company’s affairs for s 261(2)(e) purposes; given the liquidator’s reasonable attempts to obtain information from directors, the limited scope and likely significance of the requested documents, and a justified suspicion of improper payments, the court should exercise its discretion under s 266 to order examination on oath and production of specified documents.