Bol v Thurairatnam

In *Bol v Thurairatnam*, heard in the Federal Court of Australia, the applicant sought leave to proceed against the respondent, who was a bankrupt. The dispute arose from a default judgment previously entered against the respondent concerning representations made about securing a home loan. The applicant was a single mother of ten children.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant the applicant leave to proceed against the bankrupt respondent, pursuant to section 58(3)(b) of the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth). This section permits a creditor to commence or continue proceedings against a bankrupt with the leave of the court, where the proceedings are based on a fraud, fraudulent misrepresentation, or fraudulent breach of trust to which the bankrupt was a party.

Judge McNab granted the applicant leave to proceed. The court reasoned that the applicant's claim was based on allegations of false representation regarding the home loan, which, if proven, would constitute fraud. The court considered the applicant's vulnerable position as a single mother of ten children and the nature of the alleged misrepresentation to be significant factors in exercising its discretion. The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case of fraud, satisfying the threshold for granting leave under section 58(3)(b) of the *Bankruptcy Act*.