Barlaw Pty Ltd v Crouch

In Barlaw Pty Ltd v Crouch, the appellant, Barlaw, sought to appeal against the decision of the primary judge who had accepted the resignation of Mr Crouch, the registered trustee of the bankrupt's estate. Barlaw alleged that Mr Crouch was biased and had acted improperly, which led to the appellant's contention that he should have been removed from office rather than allowed to resign. The case also involved disputes over claims by Mr Bartolo's family members to be secured creditors and allegations that Mr Crouch had acted contrary to the interests of other creditors.

The court had to determine whether it was open to Barlaw to argue on appeal that Mr Crouch should have been removed from office due to an apprehension of bias, despite the fact that this argument was not raised during the original proceedings. The court also needed to assess whether the primary judge made any material errors in rejecting Barlaw's allegations of misconduct against Mr Crouch and in accepting his resignation.

The court held that Barlaw could not raise the issue of apprehended bias on appeal as it was not argued below, and therefore, Barlaw was not entitled to make this contention for the first time on appeal. Furthermore, the court found that the primary judge did not make any material errors in dismissing Barlaw's claims of misconduct against Mr Crouch. The court concluded that the primary judge's decision to accept Mr Crouch's resignation was not erroneous, and therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

The court ordered that the appeal be dismissed, that Barlaw pay the costs of the appeal and the costs of the proceeding below, and that Mr Crouch be granted liberty to apply for an order authorizing the release of any money paid by Barlaw to the Registrar by way of security for costs of the appeal.