Flynn v McCallum and Levin, as liquidators of Roslea Path Ltd HC Tauranga CIV 2005-470-611

[2010] NZHC 1164

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

CIV 2005-470-611

UNDER  THE COMPANIES ACT 1993

IN THE MATTER OF     ROSLEA PATH LTD (IN LIQUIDATION)

BETWEEN  WARREN FLYNN AND LYNELLE FLYNN

Applicants

ANDBRUCE MCCALLUM AND HENRY DAVID LEVIN, AS LIQUIDATORS OF ROSLEA PATH LTD

Respondents

Court:Heath J Venning J

Counsel:         M S McKechnie for Applicants

K Quinn for Respondents
C T Gudsell QC, Amicus Curiae

Judgment:      4 February 2010

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT Re Recall

This judgment was delivered by me on 4 February 2010 at 10.00 a.m. pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the

High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:
Lance & Lawson, PO Box 2279, Rotorua 3040

Forest Harrison, PO Box 828, Shortland Street, Auckland 1140

Counsel:
M S McKechnie, PO Box 1227, Rotorua 3040
K F Quinn, PO Box 106446, Auckland 1143
C T Gudsell QC, PO Box 19085, Hamilton 2001

Crown Law Office, PO Box 2858, Wellington

FLYNN AS LIQUIDATORS OF ROSLEA PATH LTD HC TAU CIV 2005-470-611 [4 February 2010]

[1]      The decision delivered on 17 December 2009 refers.

[2]      Counsel for the liquidators has identified certain calculation errors in the judgment.  She asks they be corrected under r 11.10.

[3]      Counsel is correct.   There are calculation errors in the judgment.   They should be addressed under r 11.10(1)(a).  We do not require a formal application.

[4]       The judgment is to be recalled and corrected as follows: [1]   At para [23] the deduction should total $15,115.

[2]       Consequently at paras [233] and [242] the amount of the fees referred to should be $240,268.

[3]       At para [243] the total should be $46,990.

[4]       That  leads  to  the  total  remuneration  approved  at  para  [243]  of

$287,258.

[5]      Counsel also raised whether the balance of fees charged of $2,202 charged after 31 August 2008 but not included in the analysis relating to correspondence, the fee issue and litigation was intentionally omitted.  It was.  The Court was of the view the reasonable and appropriate remuneration for the liquidators was on the basis set out in the judgment.  For the avoidance of doubt we confirm the additional sum of

$2,202 is not approved.

P R Heath J  G J Venning J