New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Standing to apply

Legal area

Court

22 Feb 2023

PAISI JIANG v HIGHRISE APARTMENTS LIMITED [2023] NZHC 249

Citation

[2023] NZHC 249
Court

High Court

Applicants (Highrise and GL Group) have standing under s143 as persons who wish to register instruments; however the caveator (Jiang) has established a reasonably arguable caveatable interest in the form of an equitable mortgage/charge under the loan and security agreement; given that arguable interest and the risk of prejudice to Jiang, the Court will not exercise its residual discretion to remove the caveats; accordingly the caveats must not lapse.
22 Nov 2021

ARMANI v ARMANI [2021] NZHC 3145

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3145
Court

High Court

Applicant had standing as an interested person but the court declined to appoint a receiver because appointment was not shown to be reasonably necessary under s138 of the Trusts Act nor required under the inherent jurisdiction: perceived mismanagement had been substantially addressed, Westpac indicated refinance could be considered on commercial terms, alternative remedies existed, the assets were not in imminent peril, and the costs and intrusiveness of receivership were not justified on the evidence before the court.
24 May 2019

BEST INVEST NZ COMPANY LTD (IN INTERIM LIQ) v EAST WIND COMPANY LTD (IN INTERIM LIQ) [2019] NZHC 1160

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1160
Court

High Court

On the evidence the applicants established creditor standing and the defendant companies lacked directors and otherwise persistently or seriously failed to comply with the Companies Act, satisfying the grounds in s241(4)(b),(c) and that it was just and equitable to liquidate under s241(4)(d); accordingly all six companies were ordered into liquidation and the named liquidators appointed, with costs recoverable from company assets subject to a $550/hour cap.
17 May 2019

BEST INVEST NZ COMPANY LIMITED v JAPAN BUSINESS CONSULTING COMPANY LIMITED [2019] NZHC 1101

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1101
Court

High Court

Bank evidence established that the applicant was a creditor for $1,099,900; East Wind Holdings Ltd had no director and a management vacuum creating a real risk of asset dissipation; to protect creditor interests pending substantive determination, it was necessary and appropriate to appoint interim liquidators, namely Messrs Downes and Moore, on the same powers and terms as previously appointed for related companies.
5 May 2017

RE HANARA EX PARTE THE OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE [2017] NZHC 902

Citation

[2017] NZHC 902
Court

High Court

The Official Assignee had standing under s 119 to apply in a representative capacity for the creditors of both bankrupt estates; the Assignee of Mrs Hanara had not suffered loss from the disclaimer because there was no equity at the time of disclaimer, but the Assignee representing Mr Hanara's creditors had suffered loss because the disclaimer rendered his half-share effectively unsaleable and risked a mortgagee sale producing no dividend; it was fair under s 119(3) to vest the disclaimed one half interest of Jessica Hanara in the Official Assignee as Assignee of Dimitrious Hanara to enable a…
15 Dec 2015

WILLIAMS v THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES & ORS [2015] NZHC 3217

Citation

[2015] NZHC 3217
Court

High Court

Applicants lacked standing under s 284 to seek reversal of the liquidator's final report because they were not directors, shareholders or creditors at the time of removal (their bankruptcies and disqualification severed the necessary nexus); restoration cannot achieve applicants' proposed non‑liquidation control because reversal of the final report is required to restore liquidation and control vests in the liquidators; application to restore declined.
1 Nov 2012

RE MOORE HC CHCH S. 25/92

Citation

openlaw-8063628a_59c7_47e4_b4a2_767b5e498d83.pdf
Court

High Court

The parents of adult victims do not have standing to obtain access to court documents on their behalf absent additional justificatory grounds; the application in its present form is dismissed but the applicants are granted leave to reapply with additional grounds.
30 May 2012

SOLOMONA V SOLOMONA HC AK CIV-2011-404-3668

Citation

openlaw-dc76d91c_929c_49c0_82d3_ab4117f2914f.pdf
Court

High Court

Section 143 must be read restrictively: only those who are registered proprietors or have a registered estate or a registered interest protected by the caveat have standing to apply for removal. The applicant is not a registered proprietor and has no registered estate or registered interest protected by the caveat; moreover the settlement agreement conferred only a personal entitlement to sale proceeds and not a proprietary interest in the land. Therefore the applicant lacks standing and the s 143 application must be dismissed.
10 Sept 2010

WHITIREIA COMMUNITY POLYTECHNIC V I MCLENNAN HC AK CIV-2010-404-003378

Citation

openlaw-cf7b888c_75d2_433c_873b_db61e6e4767e.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court held that Whitireia was a creditor and had standing to apply; the creditors had voted to appoint Henry Levin and Vivien Madsen-Ries; Deloitte's commercial relationships did not disqualify the proposed liquidators in the circumstances; a separation between the related liquidations could be maintained; accordingly the Court approved the appointment under s280 and awarded costs to the applicant.
11 Oct 2006

HUNT V LION LIQUOR RETAIL LIMITED HC PMN CIV-2006-454-358

Citation

openlaw-be5c4947_30c7_4fe6_8cae_5dcfb2b25a58.pdf
Court

High Court

Material facts (the solicitor's inadvertent failure to deliver automatic payment forms caused by illness) were not before the Court at the adjudication hearing; those facts entitled the applicant, as a person interested, to seek annulment under s119(1)(a), and the Court exercised its discretion to annul the adjudication subject to payment of Official Assignee's costs and the petitioning creditor's costs in the usual course.