We have updated our website and myADLS. To access your myADLS account, please reset your password by using the “Forgot password” option or Click Here. If you need further assistance, contact us at helpdesk@adls.org.nz or 09 871 1385.

Back Home 5 News 5 BNZ wins dispute over validity of liquidators’ appointment

BNZ wins dispute over validity of liquidators’ appointment

13 Jul 2023

| Author: Jamie Dierick

Personal Properties and Securities Act 1999, s 17 – secured property is present and future property of the banks – authority to appoint a liquidator – bank excluded from active participation in liquidation process under Companies Act 1993, s 240(1)(b) – bank granted leave to seek a declaration of the validity of the liquidator’s appointment – the validity of liquidators appointment dependent on provisions of Companies Act 1993 and general security arrangement – appointment deemed invalid

Bank of New Zealand v Grant [2023] NZHC 1507 per Jagose J.


The Bank of New Zealand (BNZ) appointed receivers to Claymark Group, which owed the bank $50 million (plus interest), secured by first-ranking general security arrangements (GSAs).

The GSAs under s 17 of the Personal Properties Securities Act 1999 granted the bank a broad security interest in all the company’s present and future property.

Claymark Group agreed not to deal with the secured property without the bank’s consent, except in specific circumstances. In the event of a default, Claymark Group would lose the right to deal with the secured property.

At the request of the sole shareholder and director of Claymark’s parent, the bank appointed receivers to the parent and subsidiary companies. Later, the respondents were appointed as liquidators of the parent company and subsequently appointed themselves as liquidators of the subsidiaries. The validity of these appointments was at issue in the case.

The receivers argued only they could appoint liquidators as they owned the company’s property.

The bank sought leave to seek a declaration about the appointment of liquidators.

The bank’s standing depended on whether it could claim as a creditor under s 303 of the Companies Act or as a secured creditor under s 305.

Under s 240(1)(b), the bank was excluded from active participation in the liquidation process unless it surrendered or exceeded its security. Jagose J said the bank could make a claim as a creditor if its security was insufficient. He said there was a potential impact on secured creditors’ independence and the validity of the liquidators’ appointment, as the liquidators remained neutral.

As a result, leave was granted for the bank to seek its declaration. Various provisions in the Companies Act 1993 and the context of the GSA would determine whether the court ordered declaratory relief.

The parent company surrendered its conditional voting right to the bank under the GSA, leaving the liquidators without the power to exercise their shareholding right.

Jagose J said the liquidator’s control over the parent company’s assets did not impact the bank’s right to appoint liquidators for the subsidiary companies. As a result, the judge made a declaration that the respondent’s appointment as liquidators of the subsidiary companies was invalid.


Applicable principles: security interests – rights and restrictions under general security agreements – appointment of receivers and liquidators – personal property and securities – leave to seek declaration – impact of liquidators’ control


Held: Under s 241(1)(g) of the Companies Act, the bank was granted leave to seek a declaration of the validity of the liquidators’ appointment to the subsidiary companies. The respondent’s appointment as liquidators of the subsidiary company was deemed to be invalid.


Jamie Dierick is a law clerk working for an Auckland criminal defence barrister.

Bank of New Zealand v Grant [2023] NZHC 1507

Subscribe to LawNews

The weekly online publication is full of journalistic articles written for those in the legal profession. With interviews, thought pieces, case notes and analysis of current legal events, LawNews is a key source of news and insights for anyone working within or alongside the legal field.

Sign in or
become a Member
to join the discussion.


Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest Articles

Tricky times for Kiwi companies still operating in Russia

When Russia invaded Ukraine on 22 February last year, New Zealand fund managers, companies and other entities scrambled to announce that they would divest their Russian assets. Many did. But for others, Russia has proven to be a case study in just how difficult it can be to divest.

read more

Killer Beez prospect admits burglaries, gets sentenced reduced on appeal

Kara Pompey pleaded guilty in the Auckland District Court to six charges of burglary of commercial premises in Auckland and New Plymouth and was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment. Pompey appealed this sentence on the grounds it was manifestly excessive and the sentencing judge failed to place sufficient weight on mitigating factors.

read more