Sisson v Chesterfields Preschools Limited (in liquidation) - [2020] NZCA 687

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA285/2017
[2020] NZCA 687

BETWEEN	THERESE ANNE SISSON Appellant
AND	CHESTERFIELDS PRESCHOOLS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) Respondent THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE Intervener

CA683/2017

BETWEEN

THERESE ANNE SISSON

Appellant

AND

CHESTERFIELDS PRESCHOOLS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
Respondent

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Intervener

CA684/2017

BETWEEN

THERESE ANNE SISSON

Appellant

AND

CHESTERFIELDS PRESCHOOLS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
Respondent

THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE
Intervener

CA685/2017
BETWEEN	THERESE ANNE SISSON Appellant
AND	CHESTERFIELDS PRESCHOOLS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) Respondent THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE Intervener

Hearing:	5-6 October 2020
Court:	Miller, Venning and Katz JJ
Counsel:	Appellant in person B M Russell and J C Wedlake for the Liquidators of Chesterfields P J Shamy, S Kinsler and C Russell for the Commissioner of Inland Revenue P H Courtney for Official Assignee
Judgment:	22 December 2020 at 2.00 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A The appeals in CA285/2017, CA683/2017, CA684/2017 and CA685/2017 are dismissed.
B In respect of CA285/2017, Ms Sisson must pay to the Commissioner costs for a standard appeal on a band A basis, with certification for second counsel, plus usual disbursements. Ms Sisson must pay to CPL costs for a standard appeal on a band A basis, with certification for second counsel, plus usual disbursements.
CIn respect of CA683/2017, CA684/2017 and CA685/2017 Ms Sisson must pay to CPL usual disbursements.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Katz J)

Ms Sisson appeals a decision of Gendall J in which he refused to recall a previous decision vesting certain property in Chesterfields Preschools Ltd (CPL), by consent (CA285/2017).[1] Ms Sisson also appeals three costs decisions that were made in the course of the vesting order proceeding, namely:
(a)CA684/2017 — an appeal of a costs decision of Nation J following the consolidation of the vesting order proceeding with other proceedings in June 2016.[2]
(b)CA685/2017 — an appeal of the costs decision of Gendall J of 16 February 2017 following the hearing of the vesting orders application.[3]
(c)CA683/2017 — an appeal of costs awards made by Gendall J on 24 March 2017 quantifying the costs order made on 16 February 2017. The costs were quantified at $92,013 to CPL and $87,555.38 together with disbursements of $4,114.15 to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue.[4]
[1]Chesterfields Preschools Ltd (in liq) v Sisson [2017] NZHC 859 [Refusal to recall].
[2]Chesterfields Preschools Ltd (in liq) v Sisson [2016] NZHC 1286 [Consolidation costs].
[3]Chesterfields Preschools Ltd (in liq) v Sisson [2017] NZHC 181 [Vesting costs order].
[4]Chesterfields Preschools Ltd (in liq) v Sisson [2017] NZHC 553 [Vesting costs award].
This judgment is one of three judgments being delivered contemporaneously, which together determine 11 appeals relating to the affairs of Ms Sisson and CPL. The other two judgments deal with the liquidation of CPL ([2020] NZCA 686 — the liquidation judgment) and the bankruptcy of Ms Sisson ([2020] NZCA 689 — the bankruptcy judgment). The liquidation judgment is the principal judgment. It sets out…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Sisson v Chesterfields Preschools Limited (in liquidation) 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: [2020] NZCA 687
Decision Date: 22 December 2020 at 2.00 pm

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeals in Sisson v Chesterfields Preschools Limited (in liquidation) were brought by Therese Anne Sisson, challenging various decisions of the High Court related to a vesting order and associated costs. The central issue was whether the High Court should have set aside consent orders vesting property in Chesterfields Preschools Limited (CPL), a company in liquidation. Sisson also appealed the costs decisions made during the vesting order proceedings.

The Court of Appeal found that the High Court was correct in refusing to set aside the consent orders. Sisson argued that the orders should be set aside pending determination of her claims of misfeasance against the Commissioner of Inland Revenue and others. The Court found that the misfeasance claims were irrelevant to the vesting order proceeding and that setting aside the orders would materially prejudice the Commissioner, the main creditor of CPL. The Court also rejected Sisson's argument that her consent to the orders was compromised due to her ill health and lack of understanding, finding that she had acknowledged understanding the consent terms.

As for the costs appeals, the Court determined that Sisson, having been adjudicated bankrupt before the costs awards were made, lacked standing to appeal the costs decisions. Any dispute regarding the costs would need to be brought by the Official Assignee, who did not consider there was a basis to contest the costs awards. Consequently, all appeals were dismissed, and Sisson was ordered to pay costs to CPL and the Commissioner of Inland Revenue.

Orders