Walker v Forbes - [2017] NZHC 1090

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CIV-2012-409-2486 [2017] NZHC 1090

UNDER the Companies Act 1993

IN THE MATTER

of the liquidation of Property Ventures Limited (in receivership and in liquidation)

BETWEEN

ROBERT BRUCE WALKER AND JOHN MARSHALL SCUTTER

First Plaintiffs

PROPERTY VENTURES LIMITED (in liquidation)

Second Plaintiff

FIVE MILE HOLDINGS LIMITED (in receivership and in liquidation) Third Plaintiff

CASHEL VENTURES LIMITED Fourth Plaintiff

TAY VENTURES LIMITED

(in receivership and in liquidation) Fifth Plaintiff

LIVINGSPACE PROPERTIES LIMITED (in receivership and in liquidation)

Sixth Plaintiff

BEECHNEST VENTURES LIMITED (in liquidation)

Seventh Plaintiff

TUAM VENTURES LIMITED

(in receivership and in liquidation) Eighth Plaintiff

CASTLE STREET VENTURES LIMITED

(in receivership and in liquidation) Ninth Plaintiff

WALKER v HENDERSON [2017] NZHC 1090 [24 May 2017]

LICHFIELD VENTURES LIMITED

(in receivership and in liquidation) Tenth Plaintiff

92 LICHFIELD LIMITED

(in receivership and in liquidation) Eleventh Plaintiff

ST ASAPH VENTURES LIMITED (in liquidation)

Twelfth Plaintiff

MONTECRISTO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED

(in liquidation) Thirteenth Plaintiff

AND

AUSTIN JOHN FORBES First Defendant

ALISTER SPEDDING JOHNSTON Second Defendant

GORDON LEWIS HANSEN Third Defendant

DAVID IAN HENDERSON (a bankrupt) Fourth Defendant

ADOLF de ROOS Fifth Defendant

DANIEL JAMES GODDEN Sixth Defendant

PwC (sued as a firm) Seventh Defendant

VERO LIABILITY INSURANCE Third Party

Hearing 10 and 11 May 2017

Appearances:

N R Williams for Plaintiffs
D Lester and C Child for Fourth Defendant

Judgment:

24 May 2017

[JUDGMENT OF LANG J

[on application by fourth defendant for an order that the
first plaintiff Robert Bruce Walker be held in contempt]

Thisjudgment was delivered by me on 24 May 2017 at 3.30 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date……………

[1] This proceeding is brought by the liquidator of Property Ventures Limited (PVL) and companies associated with it (the PVL group) against the former directors and auditors of the PVL group. Mr David Henderson, the fourth defendant and formerly a director of companies in the PVL group, has applied for an order that the first plaintiff Robert Bruce Walker be held in contempt for breaching the terms of an undertaking he gave to this Court in another proceeding on 1 March 2013.

Background

[2] The present proceeding is but one of several between these parties in both the

District Court and this Court. For present purposes the narrative begins on 13 and

16 December 2010, when Mr Walker was appointed as liquidator of subsidiary companies in the PVL group by the High Court. Mr Walker then began the task of assembling records relating to the affairs of the companies in respect of which he had been appointed liquidator.

[3] When this task confronted difficulties, Mr Walker made a complaint to the police about the failure of the directors of one of the companies to produce documents to him in accordance with notices he had issued under s 261 of the Companies Act 1993. Acting on the complaint, the police obtained and executed a search warrant on an address at 110 Lichfield Street, Christchurch on 8…

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 Walker v Forbes

Details

AGLC: Walker v Forbes [2017] NZHC 1090
Case: [2017] NZHC 1090
Decision Date: 24 May 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This proceeding concerns the liquidation of Property Ventures Limited and associated companies. Mr David Henderson, a former director of companies in the group, has applied for an order that Mr Robert Walker, the first plaintiff and liquidator of the PVL group, be held in contempt for breaching an undertaking he gave to this Court. The Court held that Mr Walker breached the undertaking by disclosing personal and irrelevant information to other defendants in the proceeding. The Court found that Mr Walker’s breach of the undertaking amounted to an act of contempt. The Court however made no further order because of the circumstances in which the breach occurred, the steps taken to remedy it, and Mr Henderson’s delay in bringing the present application. The Court also made no order as to costs.

Orders