cheap lenses australia

Commissioner appeal in Newmarket Trustees allowed

The Court of Appeal has overturned the High Court decision in CIR v Newmarket Trustees Limited (2011) 25 NZTC¶20-030 (the liquidations judgment).  See Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Newmarket Trustee Limited [2012] NZCA 351

Background

Newmarket Trustees is a corporate trustee that acts for a number of trusts.  Newmarket Trustees is insolvent due to unmet tax liabilities in respect of one if the many trusts of which it is a trustee.  Despite the company’s insolvency, which was not in dispute, the High Court took a pragmatic approach and elected to exercise its residual discretion under s 241(4) of the Companies Act and dismissed the application.  Factors taken into consideration by the High Court included the fact that no assets would be realised on the liquidation, there were no other creditors and the costs to the other trusts for which Newmarket Trustees acted if it were necessary for each trust to appoint a new trustee.

Court of Appeal approach

The Court of Appeal disagreed with the approach of the High Court, finding that the factors relied upon did not provide “any sufficiently compelling ground of principle or justice to overcome the general policy of the Companies Act with regard to insolvent companies” (see para 66).

The Court of Appeal took as its starting point, the recognition that the
Court has an overriding duty to esnrue that trusts are properly managed. Further noting that:

  • an insolvent trustee company, like a bankrupt trustee, will normally be considered unfit to be a trustee
  • the appointment or retention of a bankrupt trustee or an insolvent trustee company will not normally be in the best interests of the beneficiaries
  • a fundamental proposition of the law of trusts is that a trustee must be fit to discharge its functions or be liable to be discharged from office
  • wider public interests require the deterrence and removal of insolvent trustees

The Court of Appeal also considered the position in England and Australia and also referred to the fifth paper in the Review of the Law of Trusts, which considers the propriety of trustees servies being offered through trustee companies.

This decision, follows the earlier  Court of Appeal decision in CIR  v Chester Trustees Limited [2003] 1 NZLR 395.

No Responses

Be the first to leave a comment!

Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

*

Recent comments

  • Peter: When you have more than one job all your income is added up and you pay tax on the total income amount. For...
  • Joanne Martin: Hi Would you be able to email me to discuss a small company that is an LTC which I need some advice on...
  • Rizwana Saheed: You are on the right track that there is an exemption when employees work overtime but whether or not...
  • bryan: as a group of employees we get paid meal money if we exceed 11hrs on any day. Employer says he wants to tax...
  • linda: My mother is 94 and has dementia. With govt assisted carers she is still living in a home gifted within the...
  • Sharon: Hi Daniel, Can you please advise how owners of a profit-making LTC pay themselves? The owners used to pay...
  • Another Anne: My Dad is in care on full subsidy. I am EPOA. Are we able to gift some money to my brother in UK so...
  • Twagilayesu Isaya: I agree with the author of this article that Inland Revenue Department need to provide clear...
  • Quinn: Hi. I would like some clarification regarding the valuation of the investments component of the owners basis...
  • QROPS Pensions: Interesting piece of writing, you always write the most useful content & TalkTax is no exception...

Upcoming Events

  • No events.

Poll

In the past 12 months, do you think the amount of IRD investigations being undertaken has?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Authors

    For the moment, we have no authors