Futureverse Corporation Ltd

[2025] NZHC 3209

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2025-404-2940

[2025] NZHC 3209

UNDER

Part 19 of the High Court Rules 2016 and Part 15A of the Companies Act 1993

IN THE MATTER OF

FUTUREVERSE CORPORATION

LIMITED (In Receivership and Administrators Appointed)

AND

of an application by ANDREW JOHN GRENFELL and KARE JOHNSTONE as

Administrators of FUTUREVERSE CORPORATION LIMITED (In

Receivership and Administrators Appointed) Applicants

Hearing:	On the papers
Counsel:	D T Broadmore and C S Morrison for Applicants
Judgment:	24 October 2025

JUDGMENT OF LANG J

[on application for orders under s 239AT(3) of the Companies Act 1993]

This judgment was delivered by Justice Lang On 24 October 2025 at 3.30 pm

Pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date:…………………………

Solicitors/counsel:
Buddle Findlay, Auckland

RE FUTUREVERSE CORPORATION LTD [2025] NZHC 3209 [24 October 2025]

[1]        Futureverse Corporation Ltd (Futureverse), the applicant in this proceeding, is currently in voluntary administration. It is also in receivership.

[2]        As matters currently stand, the administrators are required to hold a watershed meeting no later than 29 October 2025.1 This is the meeting at which creditors will decide the future of the company. The options available at that time will be a resolution that the company enter into a deed of arrangement, a resolution that the administration should end and a resolution placing the company in liquidation.

[3]        The administrators seek an order on a without notice basis extending the time by which they must convene the watershed meeting until 10 December 2025. The application is made under s 239AT(3) of the Companies Act 1993.

Background

[4]        Futureverse is a digital content and technology generator that creates tools and infrastructure for developers. The company’s keys assets are its intellectual property and ongoing arrangements or partnerships with third parties to produce or provide digital services.

[5]        The company appointed Mr Andrew Grenfell and Mr Kare Johnstone as administrators on 30 September 2025. On the same date, 50T Holdings, LLC appointed Mr Brendan Gibson, Mr Neale Jackson and Mr Daniel Stoneman to be receivers and managers of all of the company’s assets under the provisions of a general security deed dated 10 May 2025.

[6]        The receivers are currently undertaking a sale process for the company’s assets. This is expected to be completed within a maximum of six weeks provided there are no disruptions to that process. The receivers support the present application because it will enable them to continue with the sale process without the issues that a watershed meeting at this point may cause.

1      Companies Act 1993, s 239AT.

Decision

[7]        I am satisfied that it is appropriate to grant the orders sought. The receivers are involved in negotiations with prospective purchasers and need a six week period to endeavour to complete these. A key feature of the sale strategy is to maintain the company’s existing contractual relationships and partnerships with third parties, including ongoing access to platforms on which the company’s key assets are stored. The receivers consider any disruption or termination of access to such platforms could result in a material loss of value for the company’s assets. If the watershed meeting was to be convened by 29 October 2025 it is also likely that the company would be placed in liquidation. This would have the obvious potential to disrupt the sales process and/or result in loss of value of the company’s assets.

[8]        Further, the receivers have employed 10 members of the company’s staff to allow them to keep the company’s core infrastructure operational. The company also currently employs or has contracts with seven other full-time staff. The completion of a sale of the company’s assets may result in some of these persons being employed by the purchaser.

[9]        The situation in the present case  is therefore virtually identical to that  in    Re Old Villa Wellness Group Ltd, in which this Court granted an extension of time for the watershed meeting to allow receivers to complete the sale of the company’s assets.2

[10]      Taking these factors into account, I am satisfied that it is both necessary and appropriate for the receivers to have the benefit of a further short period to complete the sale process without the disruption that is likely to be caused by the watershed meeting. I therefore make orders in terms of the draft orders that were filed with the application.

Lang J

2      Re Old Villa Wellness Group [2022] NZHC 3563.