Commissioner of Inland Revenue v New Orleans Hotel (2011) Limited

Case [2019] NZCA 4


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

 CA294/2018
 [2019] NZCA 4

BETWEEN

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE
Appellant

AND

NEW ORLEANS HOTEL (2011) LIMITED
Respondent

Court:

Brown, Clifford and Gilbert JJ

Counsel:

U R Jagose QC and M Deligiannis for Appellant
R A Hearn for Respondent

Judgment:
(On the papers)

12 February 2019 at 11.00 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The appeal is allowed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Brown J)

  1. On 7 May 2018 Associate Judge Matthews delivered a judgment dismissing the Commissioner’s application for costs in the liquidation proceedings against the respondent on the basis he was bound by the reasoning of this Court in Joint Action Funding Ltd v Eichelbaum[1] and McGuire v Secretary for Justice.[2]  Consequent upon the Supreme Court’s judgment allowing the appeal in McGuire v Secretary for Justice[3] the parties request that the Commissioner’s appeal be allowed.  No orders for costs are sought in this Court or in the High Court.

  2. The parties consenting, the Commissioner’s appeal is allowed.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Appellant
Corcoran French, Christchurch for Respondent


Details
AGLC
Commissioner of Inland Revenue v New Orleans Hotel (2011) Limited [2019] NZCA 4
Case
[2019] NZCA 4
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Commissioner of Inland Revenue appealed a decision by Associate Judge Matthews, who dismissed the Commissioner's application for costs in liquidation proceedings against New Orleans Hotel (2011) Limited. The appeal was brought before Brown, Clifford and Gilbert JJ in the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. The legal issue at hand was whether the Commissioner was entitled to costs in the liquidation proceedings against the respondent, a matter that hinged on the reasoning of the Court in Joint Action Funding Ltd v Eichelbaum and McGuire v Secretary for Justice.

The Court found that the appeal should be allowed due to the Supreme Court’s subsequent judgment in McGuire v Secretary for Justice, which allowed the appeal in that case. The Court reasoned that given the change in the legal landscape, the Associate Judge's decision was no longer applicable, and the Commissioner should be granted the appeal. Both parties consented to the appeal being allowed without seeking any orders for costs in either the Court of Appeal or the High Court.

The final orders of the Court of Appeal allowed the Commissioner’s appeal. The decision signifies a shift in the legal precedent established by prior cases, reflecting the evolving interpretation of costs in liquidation proceedings under New Zealand law.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.