Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Century City Hunter Street Limited HC Wellington CIV-2010-485-2085

[2011] NZHC 623

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CIV-2010-485-2085

IN THE MATTER OF     THE COMPANIES ACT 1993

BETWEEN  THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Plaintiff

ANDCENTURY CITY HUNTER STREET LIMITED

Defendant

CIV-2010-485-2087

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1993

BETWEEN  THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Plaintiff

ANDCENTURY CITY INVESTMENTS LIMITED

Defendant

CIV-2010-485-2088

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1993

BETWEEN  THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Plaintiff

ANDCENTURY CITY FOOTBALL LIMITED Defendant

CIV-2010-485-2089

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE V CENTURY CITY HUNTER STREET LIMITED HC WN CIV-2010-485-2085 10 March 2011

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1993

BETWEEN  THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Plaintiff

ANDCENTURY CITY DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED

Defendant

CIV-2010-485-2098

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1993

BETWEEN  THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Plaintiff

AND  CENTURY CITY MANAGEMENT LIMITED

Defendant

Hearing:         10 March 2011

(Heard at Wellington)

Counsel:         Y. Meng - Solicitor for Plaintiff

J. Toebes - Solicitor for Defendant
D.S. Lester - Solicitor for ACC in support

Judgment:      10 March 2011

ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE D.I. GENDALL

CIV-2010-485-2098

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1993

BETWEEN  THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Plaintiff

AND  CENTURY CITY MANAGEMENT LIMITED

Defendant

Solicitors:         Commissioner of Inland Revenue, PO Box 1462, Wellington

JT Law, Solicitors, PO Box 25443, Wellington

Maude & Miller, Solicitors, PO Box 50555, Porirua

[1]      Before  me  today  Mr  Toebes,  counsel  for  the  defendants  made  an  oral application that each of these files be sealed.  This application is made on the basis that he claimed they contained sensitive commercial information regarding financing and other matters concerning the defendant companies.

[2]      Mr Meng for The Commissioner of Inland Revenue and Ms Lester for the Accident Compensation Corporation indicated that they had no objection to such an order being made.

[3]      Notwithstanding this I have some concerns regarding the application which has been made.

[4]      These five proceedings are relatively high profile matters and have been the subject of substantial comment in the media to date.

[5]      In the sense it might be said “that the horse has bolted”.

[6]      Notwithstanding this, there is clearly a critical issue of timing in so far as these defendant companies are concerned regarding the provision of what is said to be a large offshore loan to the Group to clear the various debts in question.

[7]      It is crucial that nothing untoward occurs to jeopardise that loan if indeed it is likely to be forthcoming.

[8]      That said, I am not, however, prepared to make a blanket order sealing each of the five files in question.

[9]      Instead I now order that within the next 1 hour period from 10.30 am today,

10 March 2011 I will consider all the material on each file and make an order sealing that material which I regard as confidential.

[10]     In other respects each of the files in question are not to be sealed.

[11]     One final matter was raised before me today, Mr Toebes in his submissions for the defendants indicated that he thought an earlier order had been made sealing these particular files.  I cannot find any such order on any of the files.  If indeed such an order was made, it now needs to be lifted.  That said, I now make a further order lifting any particular order that may have been made earlier sealing these five files, subject to the matters I have noted above.

‘Associate Judge D.I. Gendall’