Olliver

[2022] NZHC 1368

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2021-404-000730

[2022] NZHC 1368

UNDER

Section 370 of the Companies Act 1993

IN THE MATTER OF

An appeal by GREGORY MARTIN OLLIVER

Applicant

AND

DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES

Interested Party

Hearing:

3 June 2022

Appearances:

P J K Spring and M G Orange for Applicant

S P R Conway for the Deputy Registrar of Companies (an interested party)

Judgment:

10 June 2022

JUDGMENT OF WYLIE J

This judgment was delivered by Justice Wylie On 10 June 2022 at 12.00 noon Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date:…………………………

Solicitors/counsel:

Crown Law, Wellington

Copy to:
S P R Conway

RE GREGORY MARTIN OLLIVER [2022] NZHC 1368 [10 June 2022]

Introduction

[1]                 The applicant, Gregory Olliver, has appealed a decision of the Deputy Registrar of Companies prohibiting him from holding office as a director or manager of any company for a period of four years.1

[2]                 Mr Olliver has filed an interlocutory application seeking leave to adduce further evidence in support of the appeal. The Deputy Registrar of Companies has filed a notice of opposition to this application.

Proposed further evidence

[3]                 The proposed further evidence is in two spiral bound folders. It comprises an affidavit from Mr Olliver running to 144 paragraphs, along with a large number of exhibits totalling 494 pages.

[4]                 The Deputy Registrar’s decision to prohibit Mr Olliver from holding office as a director or manager of a company arose out of Mr Olliver’s management of a company known as BBG Holdings Ltd (BBG). Mr Olliver was the sole director of the company.

[5]In his affidavit Mr Olliver:

(a)records the Deputy Registrar’s decision;

(b)discusses a subdivision project in which BBG became involved. He says that the subdivision had its genesis in his relationship with Sarah Sparks, whom he married in March 2000;

(c)sets out how the subdivision project was advanced. It involved another company, CIT Holdings Ltd (CIT), which acquired the properties which were to be subdivided;

1      Final Minute of Deputy Registrar of Companies – s 385 Companies Act 1993 – Gregory Martin Olliver, dated 20 October 2021.

(d)records that the purchases were funded by the BNZ;

(e)says that his relationship with Ms Sparks began to deteriorate in 2010 and details his view that her actions (which he says were taken without his knowledge) frustrated the subdivision project. In particular, he says that she and their solicitor, as directors of CIT, arranged for some of the properties to be transferred to a new trust;

(f)recounts steps which he says he took to try and regain control of these properties;

(g)records the BNZ’s concerns and says that, as a result, he came up with an alternative subdivision plan which he asserts would have seen BNZ repaid in full;

(h)notes that he chose BBG to take over the proposed subdivision. It was to purchase the remaining properties from CIT, although they were subject to caveats lodged by the new trust controlled by…