Alden is a seasoned commercial advocate with a focus on insolvency, debt recovery and construction litigation. He has appeared before the District Court, High Court, Court of Appeal and the Federal Court of Australia.
As an insolvency specialist, Alden has assisted and advised liquidators in respect of a wide range of issues pertaining to insolvency law including claims for:
Breaches of directors duties.
Transactions at undervalue.
Overdrawn current accounts.
Enforcement of obligations to provide documents or attend liquidator interviews.
Priorities of creditors.
Confirming the validity of liquidator appointment.
Vesting of property.
Miscellaneous debt recovery proceedings including the issuance and setting aside of statutory demands.
As a construction litigator, Alden has advised builders and homeowners in respect of their contractual obligations, duties in tort, the Consumer Guarantees Act, the Fair Trading Act and the Building Act.
Alden has also acted as counsel in complex construction litigation in respect of claims for defective workmanship, delays, overcharging and negligence across all forums including adjudication, arbitration and the Courts.
Alden has been admitted as a barrister and solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand in 2011 and the Supreme Court of Victoria in 2016.
Alden also writes regular articles. You can view these at our Publications.
If Alden’s expertise can be of assistance to you, do not hesitate to Contact us for a no obligation discussion.
Court of Appeal
|Monocrane NZ Limited (in Liq) v Grant  NZCA 139||Estoppel against claim for an overdrawn current account where Relationship Property Agreement exists.||View|
|Dalton v Hong (No.3)  NZHC 2321||Review of documents from a lawyer who alleged that documents ordered to be provided were privileged and not material||View|
|Dalton v Hong (No.2)  NZHC 1473||Review of documents from a lawyer who alleged that documents ordered to be provided were privileged and not material.||View|
|Dalton v Hong  NZHC 2266||Successful application for books, records and documents from a lawyer who alleged that the documents were privileged and not material.||View|
|Imre Builders Ltd v Vinton & Ors  NZHC 1626||Successful opposition to application for security for costs against a construction company in a building dispute.||View|
|Johnstone v Johnstone  NZHC 1541||Successful application for summary judgment to enforce amounts owing under a relationship property agreement for $1.1 million against allegations of mistake, an implied term for variation and an application to stay the proceeding pending an application to set aside the relationship property agreement.||View|
|Lot 8 Investment Ltd v R.P.S Construction Ltd  NZHC 1400||Testing the strict regime of the Construction Contracts Act 2002.||View|
|Johnson & Anor v Armstrong & Ors  NZHC 949||Successful application for summary judgment as a defendant for a large trade association against claims for misrepresentation and negligent misstatement.||View|
|Grant v Grewal & Ors  NZHC 1564||Successful application for contempt of Court.||View|
|CHK Hospitality Ltd (in Liq) & Ors v Grewal & Anor  NZHC 1143||Successful application to strike out statement of defence.||View|
|Grant v ML Trustees 2711 Ltd  NZHC 1503||Successful ratification of liquidator’s appointment and ratification of actions of decisions by co-trustee.||View|
|Grant v BB2 Holdings Ltd  NZHC 2504||Testing voidable transaction regime in regard to payments made to secured creditor.||View|
|Grant v Pandey & Ors  NZHC 623||Successfully obtaining orders requiring parties to provide the liquidator with books, records and documents of company||View|
|Grant v Pandey & Ors  NZHC 559||Successful in obtaining increased costs and costs for in-house counsel.||View|
|Grant v Westcon Group NZ Ltd  NZHC 3419||Voidable transaction. Unsuccessful in setting aside transaction but successful in obtaining an authority to support the proposition that secured creditors can be liable to a liquidator under the voidable transaction regime.||View|
|Grant v Pandey & Ors  NZHC 3330||Successful in obtaining orders requiring parties to attend an interview under oath by the liquidator.||View|
|Grant v Pandey & Ors  NZHC 3323||Successful in upholding a decision of Associate Judge on review and obtaining increased costs.||View|
|Grant v Pandey & Ors  NZHC 2844||Successful opposition to a parties protest to jurisdiction.||View|
|BY Construction Ltd (in Liq) v Mehter CIV 2011-004-2228||Successful claim for amounts owing under a construction contract.||View|
|V v IBL||Partially successful defence against claims for defective and unauthorised variations in respect of a construction contract.|
|BRSL v M||Successful claim for amounts owing under a construction contract and successful defence against defective works.|
|ACL v C||Successful claim for amounts owing under a construction contract and successful application of the prevention principle for extension of time to complete building works.|
|A v WL||Successful claim by principal against builder in negligence and for defective workmanship in respect of a construction contract.|
|S v FHA(S)L||Successful defence against alleged claims for overcharging and defective works in respect of a construction contract.|
|ACL v WPBHL||Successful claim by builder against the principal for payments due under a construction contract and successful defence against counterclaim for defective works and misrepresentation.|
|SBL v G||Successful argument on the interpretation of the application of margins and the interpretation of overheads in a construction contract.|
|SBL v G (No. 2)||Successful argument for the exclusion of supervision costs as overheads and therefore chargeable as a direct cost in a construction contract.|