First Direct Limited v Thompson and Taaffe t/a Rodney Thompson Taxis [2012] NZHC 1183 (29 May 2012)

Last Updated: 22 August 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CIV-2012-409-666 [2012] NZHC 1183

BETWEEN FIRST DIRECT LIMITED Applicant

AND RODNEY THOMPSON AND PAULA TAAFFE TRADING AS RODNEY THOMPSON TAXIS

Respondent

Hearing: 29 May 2012

(Heard at Christchurch) Judgment: 29 May 2012

_{ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE D.I. GENDALL}

_{Solicitors: Trainor MacLean, Barristers & Solicitors, PO Box 189, Christchurch}

FIRST DIRECT LIMITED V R THOMPSON AND P TAAFFE TRADING AS RODNEY THOMPSON TAXIS HC CHCH CIV-2012-409-666 [29 May 2012]

[1] Before the Court is an application to set-aside a statutory demand which purported to be issued by the respondents against the applicant.

[2] That statutory demand claimed the sum of $23,000 as a debt said to be due from the applicant to the respondents for “membership for taxi cabs 88 and 169/109” plus GST.

[3] The statutory demand was dated 20 March 2012 and at the foot of the demand was purportedly signed by:

R Thompson and P Taaffe by their authorised agent (Don Drummond private investigator) by its sole director.........

The signature which followed appeared to be that of Mr Rodney Thompson, the first named respondent.

[4] Today, 29 May 2012, when this matter was called before me, there was no appearance for Mr Thompson. Ms Taaffe, the second named respondent, did appear in person however.

[5] Ms Taaffe confirmed the contents of an email she had provided to this Court on 14 May 2012 which in essence made the following points:

(i) The original statutory demand, the subject of these proceedings, was not issued with her authority or knowledge.

(ii) That statutory demand had been improperly executed by the first named respondent, Mr Thompson.

(iii) Mr Thompson had no authority to issue the statutory demand on behalf of the Rodney Thompson Taxis Partnership, as he purported to do.

(iv) Accordingly, Ms Taaffe consented to the present application and that the statutory demand be set aside.

(v) Under all the circumstances Ms Taaffe requested that no order for costs in this matter be made against her, given what she says was her entirely innocent role in this whole matter.

[6] Before me today, Mr Trainor appeared as counsel for the applicant.

[7] Properly, Mr Trainor advised the Court that, although the application to set aside the statutory demand was filed in this Court in time on 30 March 2012, service of the application on the first named respondent, Mr Rodney Thompson, was delayed and it seems may have been out of time by a day or two.

[8] There is no question it seems that service of the application on Ms Taaffe, the second named respondent, was completed in time.

[9] I am satisfied here that service of this application on Ms Taaffe is sufficient under all the circumstances, given that the statutory demand purported to be issued on behalf of Rodney Thompson Taxis Partnership in which Ms Taaffe is a partner. Ms Taaffe I am satisfied, would have had proper authority as a partner to be served with the application itself.

[10] If I may be wrong in reaching this conclusion, in any event I am satisfied here on the undisputed evidence put before the Court by the second named respondent, Ms Taaffe, that the statutory demand is invalid as it was not properly issued on behalf of the Rodney Thompson Taxis Partnership.

[11] That said, an order is now made setting aside the statutory demand in question.

[12] As to costs, I am satisfied that no liability for costs should rest on Ms Taaffe here. And, Mr Trainor, for the applicant, indicated to me that costs were sought only

against the first named respondent, Mr Rodney Thompson, who quite clearly appears to have been the instigator of the statutory demand itself.

[13] That said, an order is now made that the first named respondent, Mr Rodney Thompson, alone is to pay costs to the applicant on this application on a category 2B basis together with disbursements as fixed by the Registrar.

‘Associate Judge D.I. Gendall’