R v Steigrad  NZCA 304
This Court of Appeal case, heard in May 2011, concerned the argument of one of the directors of Bridgecorp, Mr Steigrad, in relation to an allegation that the directors had distributed a prospectus including an untrue statement (which would breach section 58 of the Securities Act 1978).
The statement "That Bridgecorp had never missed an interest payment or, when due, a repayment of principal" was correct at the time the prospectus was registered on 21 December 2006, but from 7 February 2007, the statement became incorrect. The issue therefore became whether the reference to "distributed" in section 58 refers to the date of registration of the prospectus only or every time a prospectus is subsequently made available.
The Court held that, for the purpose of section 58, "distributed" includes every time a prospectus is made available (not just the date on which it is registered).