Badcock v Ambrose

[2006] FCA 1372

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Badcock v Ambrose [2006] FCA 1372

ROBERT JOHN BADCOCK v COLIN LOUIS AMBROSE

No SAD 140 OF 2006

FINN J
16 OCTOBER 2006
ADELAIDE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	SAD 140 OF 2006

BETWEEN:	ROBERT JOHN BADCOCK Applicant
AND:	COLIN LOUIS AMBROSE Respondent

JUDGE:	FINN J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 OCTOBER 2006
WHERE MADE:	ADELAIDE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the application.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	SAD 140 OF 2006

BETWEEN:	ROBERT JOHN BADCOCK Applicant
AND:	COLIN LOUIS AMBROSE Respondent

JUDGE:	FINN J
DATE:	16 OCTOBER 2006
PLACE:	ADELAIDE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 1 September 2006, when this matter was last before the Court, I indicated to the applicant, Mr Badcock, that to the extent that his application purported to be one seeking an annulment of his bankruptcy, no grounds whatsoever had been stated in his application in support of it.  An annulment order was the centrepiece of his claims for final relief.  I gave him the opportunity to amend his application and to put on any further affidavit material relevant to it.  I indicated that the matter would come back before me on 16 October 2006 and that I would, on that occasion, consider the application and material for the purposes of determining whether or not it has any reasonable prospects of success.  If it did not, I indicated I would give summary judgment today.

2. Not only has Mr Badcock failed to appear today, (in circumstances which would justify my dismissing his application in any event under O 35A of the Federal Court Rules), he has failed to amend his application or to put on any further material in support of it. On the material before me, insofar as the relief sought relates to the named respondent, Mr Ambrose, the application clearly has no reasonable prospects of success. For that reason, I will order that the application be dismissed under s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

3. The application also seeks interim relief against some number of other individuals and legal persons, none of whom have been made party to this proceedings.  Most of the orders seem to be in the nature of applications either for preliminary discovery or more prosaically, for subpoenas.  The interim order he seeks against his trustee in bankruptcy – that he refrain from contacting the applicant or disseminating information about him – is simply an attempt to prevent the trustee from performing his statutory function.

4. I have no material before me that would justify the making of any of the other interim orders, even assuming the existence of appropriate causes of action or apprehended causes of action to which the information sought would be relevant.  Accordingly, I will dismiss the application and order the applicant to pay the respondent's costs.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Finn.

Associate:

Dated:        19 October 2006

Counsel for the Applicant:	The Applicant appeared in person.
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr G Gretsas
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Gretsas & Associates
Date of Hearing:	16 October 2006
Date of Judgment:	16 October 2006