Official Assignee v Cameron - [2014] NZHC 2820

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

CIV-2009-470-603 [2014] NZHC 2820

UNDER the Insolvency Act 2006

IN THE MATTER OF

the bankruptcy of BRUCE JOHN CAMERON

BETWEEN

OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE Applicant

AND

BRUCE JOHN CAMERON Respondent

Hearing: 11 November 2014

Appearances:

P V Cornegé for Official Assignee
N King for Respondent

Judgment:

11 November 2014

ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE R M BELL

Solicitors:
Almao Douch, Hamilton, for Applicant
Bell & Graham, Matamata, for Respondent

Counsel:
Noel C King, Barrister, Manukau, for Respondent

OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE v BRUCE JOHN CAMERON [2014] NZHC 2820 [11 November 2014]

[1] Five years ago Mr Cameron was adjudicated bankrupt. The question in this application for directions by the Official Assignee is whether he has been discharged under s 290 of the Insolvency Act 2006, or whether he should be discharged now. The particular issue is when Mr Cameron filed a statement of affairs under s 67 of the Insolvency Act.

[2] Under s 290 of the Insolvency Act, the three years until an automatic discharge runs from when a bankrupt files a statement of affairs under s 46 or s 67. As Mr Cameron did not apply for his own adjudication, s 46 does not apply.

[3] Mr Cameron filed three statements of affairs with the Official Assignee: on

3 March 2010, 23 August 2012 and 23 October 2012. The Official Assignee says that only the last statement of affairs complies with the Insolvency Act and the Insolvency (Personal Insolvency) Regulations 2007. There is no question as to the delivery of the statements of affairs. The Official Assignee’s complaint goes to the quality of the statements supplied by Mr Cameron.

[4] The focus is on the first statement of affairs, filed on 3 March 2010. If that statement is accepted, Mr Cameron was discharged with effect from 3 March 2013. On the other hand, if that does not comply and only the later statements of affairs count, it is common ground that he should be discharged today under s 294. Even though the full three years following the statement of affairs will not have run, he will have been bankrupt for five years and that is more than long enough for him to endure that status.

[5] Section 67 of the Insolvency Act 2006 says:

67 Bankrupt must file statement of affairs with Assignee

After adjudication, the bankrupt must file with the Assignee a statement of the bankrupt’s affairs in the prescribed form, unless the bankrupt has already filed a statement under section 46.

[6] Under s 68, following adjudication the Official Assignee is required to notify the bankrupt of the adjudication and to require a statement of affairs. Under s 69, the bankrupt must file a statement of affairs in the prescribed form within 10 working days of receiving the Official Assignee’s notice.

[7] The Insolvency (Personal Insolvency) Regulations 2007 prescribe the form for a statement of affairs. Regulation 6 applies to a statement of affairs to be provided by a debtor…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Official Assignee v Cameron

Details

AGLC: Official Assignee v Cameron [2014] NZHC 2820
Case: [2014] NZHC 2820
Decision Date: 11 November 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Official Assignee brought an application for directions against Bruce John Cameron, who had been adjudicated bankrupt five years earlier. The issue before the Court was whether Cameron had been discharged from bankruptcy, or whether he should be discharged. The focus of the application was on whether Cameron had filed a compliant statement of affairs with the Official Assignee under section 67 of the Insolvency Act 2006, which would trigger the three-year period before an automatic discharge. The Official Assignee argued that Cameron's statements of affairs did not comply with the requirements of section 67 and the Insolvency (Personal Insolvency) Regulations 2007. The Court found that Cameron had substantially complied with his obligations under section 67 and the Regulations. It was sufficient for the purposes of the statute that Cameron had provided a statement of affairs that enabled the Official Assignee to begin the administration of the bankruptcy. The Court found that Cameron had filed a compliant statement of affairs on 3 March 2010 and that he was discharged from bankruptcy on 3 March 2013. It was unnecessary to make an order for Cameron's early discharge under section 294 of the Insolvency Act. Cameron was awarded his costs as he had to have this matter determined in court.

Orders