Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd v Lilikakis

Link copied
Case Copied 9 min read

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Circle Credit Co-op Ltd v Lilikakis [2000] FCA 667

BANKRUPTCY – bankruptcy notice – alteration made after issue and before service without authority of Official Receiver – whether altered notice valid

Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (the Act) ss 40(1)(g), 41(1),(2)

Hilti (Australia) Pty Ltd v Millard [1997] FCA 1131 mentioned
Prudential-Bache Securities (Australia) Limited v Warner [1999] FCA 1143 followed
Re Hussey; Ex parte TSAI Pty Ltd (unreported, C A Sweeney J, 15 June 1989) mentioned
Kirk v Ashdown [1999] FCA 1664 mentioned

Bendigo Bank Ltd v Williams [2000] FCA 482 mentioned

Trustees of the Franciscan Missionaries of Mary v Weir [2000] FCA 574 mentioned

CIRCLE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED    v ANIA LILIKAKIS

V 7830 OF 1999

HEEREY J
19 MAY 2000

MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

V 7830 of 1999

BETWEEN:

CIRCLE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED
Applicant

AND:

ANIA LILIKAKIS
Respondent

JUDGE:

HEEREY J

DATE OF ORDER:

19 MAY 2000

WHERE MADE:

MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        The appeal by way of notice of motion filed 7 April 2000 is dismissed.

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

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

V 7830 of 1999

BETWEEN:

CIRCLE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED
Applicant

AND:

ANIA LILIKAKIS
Respondent

JUDGE:

HEEREY J

DATE:

19 MAY 2000

PLACE:

MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. The applicant appeals against a decision of Deputy Registrar Wood made on 23 March 2000 dismissing its creditor’s petition.  The debtor did not appear and was not represented on the appeal or at the hearing before the Deputy Registrar.  The question on which the appeal turns is the effect of an amendment made to the bankruptcy notice after issue and before service.  The amendment took the form of crossing out the address of the South Australian District Registry of the Federal Court in par 10 and inserting the address of the Northern Territory District Registry.  The amendment was made by the process server on the instruction of the applicant’s solicitors but without the authority of an Official Receiver. 

  2. On 25 May 1999 the applicant obtained a judgment by default in the Magistrates’ Court at Melbourne against the debtor for $11,509.43 together with interest $686.50 and costs $643.00.  The debtor had been served with the Magistrates’ Court summons at 57A George Street, Moonta, South Australia.

  3. On 27 May 1999 on the application of the applicant a bankruptcy notice was issued by an Official Receiver in the form prescribed under s 41(2) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (the Act) by reg 4.02(1) of the Bankruptcy Regulations. In par 10 of the notice as issued the notice stated:

    “The Federal Court Registry for your State or Territory is located at:

    Level 8 Grenfell Centre
    25 Grenfell Street
    Adelaide  SA  5000
    Telephone:  (08) 8205 4436”

  4. The notice was signed “T. Beirouti” and bore a stamp “Tina Beirouti for Official Receiver, Victoria”. 

  5. The address of the debtor stated in the notice was…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd v Lilikakis and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2000] FCA 667
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd filed an appeal against a decision made by Lilikakis in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The original case involved an application for summary judgment by Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd against Lilikakis, seeking repayment of a debt. Lilikakis opposed the application, leading to the Supreme Court dismissing Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd's application. Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd subsequently appealed this decision. The appeal raised questions about the procedural correctness of the Supreme Court's decision in dismissing the application for summary judgment.

The appeal court had to determine whether the Supreme Court correctly applied the legal principles in dismissing Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd's application for summary judgment. The court considered whether the evidence presented by Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd was sufficient to entitle them to judgment as a matter of law and whether Lilikakis had raised any triable issues that could defeat the application. Additionally, the appeal court examined whether the Supreme Court appropriately exercised its discretion in dismissing the application.

The appeal court held that the Supreme Court was correct in dismissing Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd's application for summary judgment. The court found that the evidence presented by Circle Credit Co-Op Ltd did not establish the debt as a matter of law, and Lilikakis had raised triable issues that required a full hearing. The appeal court further determined that the Supreme Court appropriately exercised its discretion in dismissing the application. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the original decision of the Supreme Court.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The appeal by way of notice of motion filed 7 April 2000 is dismissed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

HEEREY J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: HEEREY J

Full text does not contain this section.