NZLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

High Court of New Zealand Decisions

You are here:  NZLII >> Databases >> High Court of New Zealand Decisions >> 2015 >> [2015] NZHC 1930

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Havenleigh Global Services Limited v Henderson [2015] NZHC 1930 (13 August 2015)

Last Updated: 19 December 2016


IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY



CIV-2010-409-000559 [2015] NZHC 1930

IN THE MATTER
of the Insolvency Act 2006
AND

IN THE MATTER
of the bankruptcy of
DAVID IAN HENDERSON
BETWEEN
HAVENLEIGH GLOBAL SERVICES LIMITED AND FM CUSTODIANS LIMITED
Judgment Creditors (Substituted
Creditors)
AND
DAVID IAN HENDERSON Judgment Debtor


Hearing:
3-7 , 11-13 August 2015
Appearances:
J Foster and C R Vinnell for Official Assignee
D I Henderson (Bankrupt) in Person
T Cooley as counsel assisting the Court (excused from the hearing)
Ruling:
13 August 2015




RULING (NO. 5) OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE

as to Mr Henderson's evidence in relation to Mr Marshall




[1] Mr Henderson is in the course of presenting his own evidence in this public

examination, following questions asked by the Court and Ms Foster for the Assignee.












HAVENLEIGH GLOBAL SERVICES LIMITED v HENDERSON [2015] NZHC 1930 [13 August 2015]

This morning we commenced the second day of Mr Henderson’s presentation of his own evidence.

[2] Mr Henderson at the commencement of the day’s hearing produced a bundle of correspondence (Exhibit L). He then proceeded to give evidence in relation to the contents of the correspondence.

[3] In the course of his presentation, Mr Henderson began drawing from the documents instances of his general cooperation with his Case Officer (Mr Marshall).

[4] I indicated to Mr Henderson that the only relevant allegations for my determination in relation to Mr Marshall’s and Mr Henderson’s contact relate to specific matters of cooperation or breach on Mr Henderson’s part, being:

(a) an allegation that Mr Henderson failed to disclose to the Assignee (through Mr Marshall or otherwise) income and acquired assets during his bankruptcy, including by not completing required statements of affairs in relation to income, expenditure and other matters (refer paragraph [4](v) Report of the Official Assignee as particularised in paragraphs [59] – [69]; and

(b) an allegation that Mr Henderson breached prohibitions and restrictions imposed upon him during the period of bankruptcy (paragraph [4](iv) Report of the Official Assignee as particularised at paragraphs [70] – [93]).

[5] I explained to Mr Henderson that his general cooperation with Mr Marshall has not been put in issue by the Assignee but rather the Assignee identifies issues in relation to those to specific matters, with which Mr Marshall had involvement. Mr Henderson’s presentation must be relevant to those specific matters in his relationship with Mr Marshall.

[6] When Mr Henderson resumed his presentation he came back to material which related not to the specifically relevant matters at [4] above but to his general cooperation with Mr Marshall.

[7] At that point I ruled that the only material relevant in relation to Mr Henderson’s relationship with Mr Marshall was on the particular matters identified at [4] above and that Mr Henderson was in his remaining presentation, where it touched upon his dealings with Mr Marshall, to confine himself to those matters.

[8] I record that I did so after Ms Foster for the Assignee had confirmed that the Assignee makes no allegation of a lack of general cooperation on the part of Mr Henderson in his dealings with Mr Marshall, confining herself to the particular matters identified at [4] above.

Ruling

[9] I therefore confirm my ruling as follows:

(a) the only matters in this examination relevant to the dealings between Mr Henderson and Mr Marshall are those touching upon the matters identified in the Assignee’s report at paragraphs 4[iv] and [v], as particularised in paragraphs [59] – [93] of the Report;

(b) Mr Henderson, so far as he gives evidence as to his dealings with Mr

Marshall, is to confine himself to matters particularly relating to those identified issues.



Solicitors:

Anthony Harper, Christchurch.

Kensington Swan, Auckland

Copy to:

Mr D I Henderson, Christchurch. Luke Cunningham Clere, Wellington

Associate Judge Osborne


NZLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZHC/2015/1930.html