Havenleigh Global Services Ltd v Henderson

Link copied
Case Copied 77 min read

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CIV-2010-409-000559 [2016] NZHC 2969

IN THE MATTER of the Insolvency Act 2006

AND

IN THE MATTER

of the bankruptcy of DAVID IAN HENDERSON

BETWEEN

HAVENLEIGH GLOBAL SERVICES LIMITED AND FM CUSTODIANS LIMITED

Judgment Creditors (Substituted
Creditors)

AND

DAVID IAN HENDERSON Judgment Debtor

Public

Examination:

Submissions:

3-7, 11-14, 19-20 August, 27 October 2015

10-12 October 2016

Appearances:

J N Foster and C R Vinnell for Official Assignee
D I Henderson (bankrupt) in person

T Cooley (counsel assisting the Court) (attending for submissions)

Livingspace Properties Ltd (in liq) and FM Custodians Ltd
(objecting creditors) (excused from attendance)

Judgment:

9 December 2016

JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE

under ss 298 – 299 Insolvency Act 2006

HAVENLEIGH GLOBAL SERVICES LIMITED v HENDERSON [2016] NZHC 2969 [9 December 2016]

The public examination of a bankrupt ...............................................................[1] The statutory regime ............................................................................................[4] Sections 298 – 299 Insolvency Act  [4] The Court’s discretion under s 298 of the Act  [7] The Court’s discretion under s 299 of the Act  [12] What is the subject-matter of a public examination?  [15] What is not the subject-matter of the public examination?  [16] The circumstances of Mr Henderson’s adjudication in bankruptcy .............[19] The immediate cause of bankruptcy  [19] The broader background to Mr Henderson’s bankruptcy  [22] Extent of indebtedness at adjudication  [28]

(a)     Form of claims submitted by creditors  [40] (b)     Calculation of interest  [41] (c)     “Overstated claim” – Allied Farmers Investments Ltd

(Allied Farmers)  [42] (d)     “Overstated claim” – Bank of New Zealand (BNZ)  [44] (e)     “Overstated claim” – SCF (now CAM)  [45] (f)      “Overstated claim” – Dominion Finance Group Ltd (Dominion)       [47] (g)     “Overstated claim” – Equitable  [48] (h)     “Overstated claim” – FM Custodians Ltd (FM Custodians)               [49] (i)      “Overstated claim” – Inland Revenue Department (IRD)                   [50] (j)      “Overstated claim” – Strategic Finance Limited (Strategic)               [51] (k)     Unlisted creditors’ claim – Mr Henderson’s sister and brother-in-law [52]

(m)     Cross-claim – Allied Farmers  [53] (n)     Cross-claim – SCF [54] Summary of the extent of Mr Henderson’s indebtedness                [55] Objections to discharge......................................................................................[59] Mr Henderson’s pre-adjudication conduct......................................................[61] First bankruptcy – 1996 to 1999     [61] The direct causes of Mr Henderson’s present bankruptcy ............................[72] Personal guarantees of the debts of companies and an associate  [74] Personal taxation liability – the RFD advances  [94]

Mr Henderson’s business approach as explained to the Ministry of

Economic Development  [116] Corporate structure established between 1999 and 2010  [121] Standard of corporate management  [124] Corporate management approach  [129] Administration  [133] Rulings and judgments of matters previously litigated ................................[152] Behaviours identified in judgments and rulings  [152] Early taxation offences  [153]

Mr Henderson’s agent-liability for GST on the Christchurch City

Council sale – August 2008  [154] (a)     Issue  [154] (b)     The Taxation Review Authority decision  [157] (c)     Related litigation – PVIL v Commissioner of Inland Revenue           [167] (d)     Further related litigation – Commissioner of Inland Revenue

v Forbes  [170] (e)     Mr Henderson’s evidence at public examination  [172] Financial Reporting Act offences – September 2008  [175]

(a) Issue [175]
(b) The…
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Havenleigh Global Services Ltd v Henderson and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2016] NZHC 2969
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

David Ian Henderson (Mr Henderson) was adjudicated bankrupt on 29 November 2010. The Official Assignee objected to his automatic discharge from bankruptcy. The court held a public examination of Mr Henderson. The Assignee submitted that the court should either refuse an order of discharge or, if discharged, restrict Mr Henderson from engaging in business after discharge. Mr Henderson submitted that he should be immediately discharged without condition or restriction. The court considered the matter through an interest-based approach. It concluded that the public and community interest would not be adequately protected by an unrestricted discharge of Mr Henderson from bankruptcy. The court discharged Mr Henderson from bankruptcy on 27 January 2017, with conditions that he should not enter into any contract by which he personally guarantees the debt or other obligation of another person or entity and he is prohibited until 9 December 2022 from doing any or all of the following things without the court's permission: (i) entering into, carrying on, or taking part in the management or control of any business or class of business; (ii) being a director of any company; (iii) directly or indirectly being concerned, or taking part, in the management of any company; (iv) being employed by a relative of Mr Henderson; and (v) being employed by a company, trust, trustee, or incorporated society that is managed or controlled by a relative of Mr Henderson.

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.