Global Barter International Limited v Persepolis Securities Limited

[2015] NZHC 1396

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV 2015-404-000120 [2015] NZHC 1396

BETWEEN

GLOBAL BARTER INTERNATIONAL

LIMITED Plaintiff

AND

PERSEPOLIS SECURITIES LIMITED Defendant

Hearing:	19 June 2015
Appearances:	R Slade for the Plaintiff R E Lawn for the Defendant
Judgment:	19 June 2015

ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE CHRISTIANSEN

GLOBAL BARTER INTERNATIONAL LIMITED v PERSEPOLIS SECURITIES LIMITED [2015] NZHC

1396 [19 June 2015]

[1]      The plaintiff has applied to the Court for an order for liquidation of the defendant.    The  plaintiff’s  evidence  is  that  a  statutory  demand  was  served  on

12 November 2014 containing a demand for payment of the sum of $344,805.95. The demand expired on 3 December 2014.  No application was filed to set aside the statutory demand. The statutory demand was not complied with.

[2]      On 27 February 2015 the defendant filed and served a statement of defence. From that it appears the liquidation application is opposed because:

(a)       the defendant was not served with a statutory demand; (b)     the debt was disputed; and

(c)       the defendant is able to satisfy its debts.

[3]      When scheduling today’s hearing the Court provided directions requiring the

filing and service of evidence and submissions.

[4]      The evidence of the plaintiff is that the statutory demand was taped to the

office door of the defendant’s registered office.

[5]      The plaintiff also provided evidence to prove the debt was owing.

[6]      No evidence or submissions were filed on behalf of the defendant.  Mr Lawn appeared and queried the absence of an affidavit he believed had been filed by the company’s  accountant  which  he  indicated  would  provide  evidence  challenging claims of service of the statutory demand.

[7]      The Court is satisfied with the plaintiff’s evidence of service of the statutory demand,  proof  of  amount  of  the  debt  claimed,  and  confirming  no  creditor arrangement was agreed.

[8]      In the circumstances the Court grants the plaintiff’s application for an order for liquidation of the defendant.  The Official Assignee is appointed.  The time of the order is noted at: 10.02am.

[9]      The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs on a 2B basis together with disbursements.  The Court certifies the costs to be calculated on the basis of a half

day hearing.

Associate Judge Christiansen