Norris v Johnson Price Holdings Limited

[2012] NZHC 1804

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NELSON REGISTRY

CIV-2011-442-517 [2012] NZHC 1804

BETWEEN  PATRICK DEAN NORRIS Appellant

ANDJOHNSON PRICE HOLDINGS LIMITED Respondent

Hearing:         24 July 2012 (On papers)

(Heard at Wellington)

Counsel:         P D Norris (In person)

S Sansom and G P Malone for Respondent

Judgment:      24 July 2012

JUDGMENT OF MILLER J

Introduction

[1]      Mr Norris seeks leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal from my judgment of

8 March 2012.

Narrative

[2]      Mr Norris was appointed as liquidator of Trafalgar Top Limited. In carrying out these duties, he entered into an agreement with the company’s landlord, Johnson Price Holdings Limited, to continue the company’s lease. Johnson Price Holdings sought to recover rent for that period in the District Court, and won.

[3]      Mr Norris appealed the District Court judgment to the High Court on several

issues including Mr Norris’s personal liability as liquidator, jurisdiction, and the

interpretation of the agreement. I dismissed the appeal.

NORRIS V JOHNSON PRICE HOLDINGS LIMITED HC NEL CIV-2011-442-517 [24 July 2012]

Leave to appeal

[4]      Mr Norris now seeks leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal on two questions of law:

(a)      whether  a  liquidator  is  personally  liable  for   a  breach   of  an arrangement he entered qua liquidator;  and

(b)whether a creditor must apply to the High Court under s 284 of the Companies Act 1993 to remedy breach of such an arrangement, or may sue in the District  Court in its general jurisdiction.

[5]      Mr Norris must show these questions are capable of bona fide and serious argument  in  a  case  involving  some  interest,  public  or  private,  of  sufficient importance to outweigh the cost and delay of further appeal.

[6]      I do not think that either question is capable of serious argument.  It has long been the law that applications to the Court in a winding up are made by or against the liquidator personally.  The rent in issue in this case may have been an expense incurred in the winding up, payable out of company assets, but the liquidator, having reached an agreement with the landlord to pay it, remains personally liable.

[7]      For the reasons given in my judgment Johnson Price Holdings Limited was entitled to sue for breach of contract, as opposed to invoking the court’s supervisory jurisdiction under s 284.   The claim was within the District Court’s general jurisdiction.

[8]      Accordingly I decline leave to appeal.

Miller J

Solicitors:

Solutions Law Office, Nelson for Respondent