Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

REGENT STREET, LIMITED.

♦— —T- ' PETITION TO WIND UP COMPANY. ' SUPREME.COURT ORDER. > An order for the wiudiDsr up of: lieI gent Street, Limited, was made in the ) Supreme Court yesterday by his Honour . Mr Justice MaeGregor, on the petition - of.' Mrs J. D. Shaw, of "Wellington, a creditor of the company for the sum of £450 13s 9d. It Tvas also ordered that the order be not scaled for 14 days, so that the company might pay i the amount of the debt vrithin that period, i Mr K. M. Grcsson appeared for the ' petitioner, Mr \\ r . J. Stacey for the company, and Mr A. C. Cottrell for the, ' first mortgagee, the Commissioner of tho Is'ew Zealand Government Life Insurance Department. Mr Grcsson, opening his case, said that there were three points which ho would have to deal with: —(1) The attitude of the secured creditor in opposing the petition; (2) the fact that the assets were entirely covered by debentures and that a receiver was in possession; and (3) the alleged unwillingness of the other secured creditors to the Court order. The attitude of the first mortgagee in opposing the petition was immaterial, ho submitted, and he did not propose to deal with that aspect. It was not disputed that the assets Trerc covcrctJ by debentures and that a recoivor was in possession, and he submitted that far from the law being against the petition on this ground, it was in favour, and for that very fact an order should be made. He quoted legal authorities and submitted further that it was in tho public interest that a company which was a legal obstruction and a name only should be wound up. It would enable investigation to be made into matters surrounding the formation of the company and where the money invested in the company had gone. The debt in respect of winch the proceedings had been taken was for damages for misrepresentation which the company had not even contested. The Unsecured Creditors. A most material point was the alleged unwillingness of the unsecured creditors to the order of the Court, he continued. There was an affidavit on the flic by the secretary of the company stating ( that the other unsecured creditors were J opposed to the petition. This was, he considered, an entirely novel manner of expressing the views of these creditors, and he doubted whether it could 1 bo construed as bringing them into j Court to signify their alleged objection. j Tho petition had been Jilcd at the bej ginning of December and this affidavit bad not been fded until March 0. In tho short time at his disposal he had selected one of the unsecured creditors at- random, the Christchurch City Council, and made enquiries about its attitude, but neither the Town Clerk nor the City Treasurer said that he knew anything about tho attitude of the unsecured creditors, as it was expressed in the affidavit. He contended that the unsecured creditors were indifferent and that this was shown by the fact that only five of these creditors had been present at a meeting confirming n. previous resolution of opposition to ' the petition. The Financial Position. For the company, Mr Staccy said that the assets to-day wcce greater in value than the claims of secured and unsecured creditors. The debts of the company were approximately £78,000, of which £41,220 was owing to the first mortgagee. £01.13 to the second mortgagee, £13,;"io0 to the debenture holders, rind £17,838 to the unsecured creditors. The value placed on the property today by two person's was £54,000, and a valuator assessed it at. £87,000. The affidavit of Mr V. G. Dunn, the secretary of the company, followed a meeting' held on February 16, at which 17 creditors were present, and these had consented to oppose the petition. A second meeting was held on February 25 and the five creditor's present confirmed the previous resolution. He therefore submitted that the affidavit was good. His Honour: How can T believe that when there is no appearance of the unsecured creditors. If these meetings were held, why was that fact not set out. in the affidavit? M'r Stacoy, continuing, said that if tho company were allowed to carry on it would be able to pay the debts. His Honour: If you can go on getting j into debt you say that you will bo able to pay. ! Mr Staccy: Yp«\ your Honour. His Honour: That i« insolvent trading, surely. Mortgagee's Objection. Mr Cottrell said that the Commissioner of the Xew Zealand Government Life Insurance department had received up to the present certain amounts of money from the company towards the interest, on tho lirst mortgage, and ho felt that if the company was ordered to be liquidated the assets would;be endangered. Though tlic full amount of interest had not been paid, the department was, in the circumstances, satisfied that the company was doing its best, and there was reason to believe that in the futuro the value of the street and the buildings would improve. The point to consider was whether the company would have a chance of coining out on top. His Honour: How can 1 decide that? It is entirely a question of prophecy. How long can I say that this depression is going to last? What is the position of this company? Is it solvent or. insolvent? Mr Cottrell: It is difficult to say. It depends on what the value of the assets is. His Honour: Surely the position .is shown by tho fact that the mortgagee is not getting his full interest. Mr Cottrell: But ho is satisfied. | ■ His Honour: That is because he is in a winning position. ! The Judgment. In giving judgment his Honour said that the petition had come before him after considerable delay caused apparently by the failure of negotiations between the parties. After referring to the two meetings of tho unsecured creditors, ho said that it appeared to him that there had not been any real effort to obtain a meeting representative of the creditors. The objection of the first mortgagee had'nothing to do with tho matter and he proposed to dismiss the objection from his consideration. It had been suggested that the unsecured credit tors opposed the petition but the secretary in his affidavit did not say anything about the two meetings. If the unsecured creditors had any real feeling against the petition they would have been in Court represented by counsel and ho was not satisfied that there was any real desire on their part to oppose the ' petition. The fact must not be forgot- ' ten that the judgment had been-out- ' standing for a considerable time and ! had realised only £39. The petitioner , s had tho right'to an order. In the eir,- j cumstane'ds his duty was perfectly plain J and he would make an order accord-. ! ingly. - I Counsel then agreed to the order not '' being sealed immediately to allow the (

company an opportunity to find the money, and his Honour ordered that the judgment be not scaled until the expiration of 14 days. Costs. & 10.10s, were allowed to the petitioner.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19330309.2.8

Bibliographic details

REGENT STREET, LIMITED., Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20800, 9 March 1933

Word Count
1,190

REGENT STREET, LIMITED. Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20800, 9 March 1933

Working