Bankrupt and with his family trust under control of court-appointed receivers, Harry Memelink had no grounds to resume control of trust assets and have receivers removed; part of a long running dispute over corporate body management of a block of Wellington commercial units. Mr Memelink has failed multiple times in having receivers removed, going so far as challenging sitting judges with allegations of bias.
Mr Memelink is bankrupt. Insolvency Service told the High Court resolution of his bankruptcy has been hampered by poor accounting records, with personal transactions and family trust transactions mixed in together. Chartered accountants from BDO Wellington are in control of his family trust, Link Trust No.1, with High Court instructions to sell assets and identify creditors.
Mr Memelink alleges trust assets are being sold at an undervalue. Justice Grice ruled there was no evidence to support these allegations. BDO says asset sales are being hampered by Mr Memelink’s interference. Insolvency Service told the High Court it appears Link Trust owes Mr Memelink personally some $4.06 million; funds they hope to recover in payment of Mr Memelink’s bankruptcy creditors. There are doubts whether Link Trust is solvent.
Mr Memelink’s latest application to remove the receivers was dismissed in the High Court. There were no legal grounds for removal. Mr Memelink’s current complaints had been dealt with at previous court hearings, the court said.
In two prior instances, Mr Memelink unsuccessfully challenged rulings by trial judges, alleging a conflict of interest in one instance and bias in the other. He was told that adverse court rulings are not evidence of bias and that our legal system does not allow ‘judge-shopping’ with litigants casting around to get their preferred judge. Presented as evidence supporting one of Mr Memelink’s allegations was a statement that a trial judge demonstrated bias with the abrupt manner his lawyer was treated in court. This allegation did not fit the facts, the High Court said. The lawyer named did not represent Mr Memelink at the court hearing in question.
Body Corporate 81012 v. Memelink – High Court (31.07.23)
23.126