Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Conley, in the matter of Conley

[2006] FCA 1011

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Conley, in the matter of Conley
[2006] FCA 1011

IN THE MATTER OF STEPHEN CONLEY

COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA v STEPHEN CONLEY
NSD 941 OF 2006

RARES J
4 JULY 2006
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 941  OF 2006

BETWEEN:	COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA APPLICANT CREDITOR
AND:	STEPHEN CONLEY RESPONDENT DEBTOR
JUDGE:	RARES J
DATE OF ORDER:	4 JULY 2006
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        A sequestration order be made against the estate of Stephen Conley.

2.The applicant creditor’s costs, including any reserved costs, be taxed and paid from the estate of the respondent debtor in accordance with the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth).

THE COURT NOTES THAT:

1.The date of the act of bankruptcy is 7 March 2006.

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

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 941  OF 2006

BETWEEN:	COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA APPLICANT CREDITOR
AND:	STEPHEN CONLEY RESPONDENT DEBTOR

JUDGE:	RARES J
DATE:	4 JULY 2006
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(REVISED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT)

1. This is the hearing of a creditor's petition filed by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia on 16 May, 2006.  I am satisfied that the debtor, at the time of the filing of the petition on 16 May 2006, owed the judgment creditor $12,252.80 being the balance of the amount due under a final judgment recovered in the Local Court of New South Wales at Manly on 9 December, 2005.  Consideration for the debt was money lent.  I am satisfied that the applicant creditor does not hold security over the property of the respondent, and that at the time when the act of bankruptcy was committed on 7 March 2006, the debtor, having been served with a bankruptcy notice on 14 February 2006, was ordinarily resident in Australia.

2. I am satisfied that all the conditions necessary for compliance with the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) and rules have been established by the applicant.

3. This is a sad case involving a matter that is obviously of great significance to Mr Conley.  He has had a number of attempts to resolve claims he has had against the bank in various proceedings, including proceedings opposing the order for possession which led to the ultimate sale of his home.  Those proceedings went at least to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which rejected Mr Conley's claim that the mortgage or transactions over his home were such as attracted relief under the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW).

4. The bank exercised its power of sale in circumstances where Mr Conley had obtained a valuation from RPG Property Services which had been provided to the bank suggesting that the property was worth $700,000.  Ultimately, it was sold for something in the order of about $375,000 at an auction.  He brought proceedings then in the District…