Bride v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bride v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [1999] FCA 1519

BANKRUPTCY – application for stay of contributions by bankrupt pending the outcome of legal actions – whether Court has jurisdiction under s 178 in these circumstances.

Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), ss 139P, 139S, 139T, 139ZA, 139ZF, 139ZG, 178

Re Wheeler; Ex parte Wheeler v Halse (1994) 54 FCR 166
Poletti v Commissioner of Taxation (1994) 52 FCR 154
McGoldrick v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (1993) 47 FCR 547

WENDY MARGARET BRIDE v OFFICIAL TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY

W 7091 of 1999

BOON JR
3 NOVEMBER 1999
PERTH

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W7091 OF 1999

BETWEEN:	WENDY MARGARET BRIDE Applicant
AND:	OFFICIAL TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY Respondent
JUDGE:	BOON JR
DATE OF ORDER:	3 NOVEMBER 1999
WHERE MADE:	PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        The application be dismissed.

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

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W7091 OF 1999

BETWEEN:	WENDY MARGARET BRIDE Applicant
AND:	OFFICIAL TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY Respondent

JUDGE:	BOON JR
DATE:	3 NOVEMBER 1999
PLACE:	PERTH

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The applicant, Mrs Bride, has applied pursuant to s 178 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 as amended for orders as follows:

   “1.The monthly contributions of $187.00 payable to the Attorney General’s Department, Common Investment Fund, WA Official Account, as ordered by Mr D Smithson, for the Official Receiver in Bankruptcy, “Be Stayed” until the outcome of the following actions:-

   (a)High Court Appeal, P20 of 1998, Bride vs KMG Hungerfords.

   (b) Supreme Court Action, CIV 1804 of 1989, Bride vs Peat Marwick Mitchell.

   (c)Supreme Court Action, CIV 1570 of 1989, Bride vs The Australian Bank Limited and Oths.

   (d)       Supreme Court Action, CIV 2041 of 1990, Bride vs Stewart.

   (e)Supreme Court Action, CIV 1632 of 1996, Bride vs Anglo Foods, Freehills, Muirwil Nominees etc.”

2. The respondent, the Official Trustee in Bankruptcy, opposes the application on the following grounds:

   “1.The Applicant is not entitled to bring, and this Honourable Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain, an application for a stay of monthly contributions to her bankrupt estate, whether under s 178 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 or otherwise.

   2.In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, it should not grant the application because no realistic prospect of benefit to the applicant’s unsecured creditors flowing from the litigation in which the Applicant and her husband are involved is demonstrated.”

3. In an affidavit filed by the applicant in support of her application she states that she is a registered nurse and has worked night shift for the past fifteen years at the Katanning District Hospital.  She states that her husband, Edward James Bride, is an experienced litigant, and acts on behalf of the applicant’s family with the applicant’s total support.

4. The applicant states that because of the extent of the litigation in which she and her husband are…