Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Peter Charles Eady Summary

CATEGORY: NO QUESTION OF PRINCIPLE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

MATTER NO 7390 of 1997

BETWEEN:

COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA
Applicant

AND:

PETER CHARLES EADY
Respondent

MATTER NO 7391 OF 1997

BETWEEN: COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA
APPLICANT

AND: GWENDA YVONNE EADY
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

SACKVILLE J.

DATE:

2 SEPTEMBER 1998

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

HIS HONOUR: There are two matters before the court today. Each is a creditor's petition.

The first matter, NG 7390 of 1997, is a petition brought by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia as creditor against Peter Charles Eady as debtor. The creditor's petition in this matter was filed on 10 April 1997.

The second matter, NG 7391 of 1997, is a creditor's petition also filed on 10 April 1997. Once again the creditor is the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. The debtor in these proceedings is Gwenda Yvonne Eady.

I have been informed by Mr Ireland, who appears on behalf of the creditor, that the creditor wishes to withdraw each of the petitions. Mr Ireland accepts that the consequence is that each petition will be dismissed. Mr Ireland makes no application for costs.

In these circumstances the appropriate order is that the petitions in each matter, namely NG 7390 and NG 7391 of 1997, be dismissed. In each matter I make no order as to costs.

I certify that this and the preceding one (1) pages are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Sackville

Associate:

Dated: 2 September 1998

Solicitor for the Applicant: L.E. Taylor

Date of Hearing: 2 September, 1998

Date of Judgment: 2 September, 1998

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Federal Court of Australia was presented with two creditor's petitions from the Commonwealth Bank of Australia against Peter Charles Eady and Gwenda Yvonne Eady, respectively. Both petitions were filed on 10 April 1997. The primary issue before the court was the withdrawal of these petitions by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. The bank, through its representative, Mr Ireland, indicated that it wished to withdraw both petitions and accepted that this would result in the dismissal of each petition. Consequently, the court needed to determine the appropriate action in response to the bank's withdrawal of the petitions.

In addressing the issue, Sackville J noted that the petitions were to be dismissed due to the bank's decision to withdraw them. The court emphasised that no application for costs was made by the bank, and thus, no order regarding costs would be made in either case. The dismissal of the petitions was straightforward, given the explicit withdrawal by the creditor. The court's reasoning was grounded in the procedural aspect of creditor's petitions and the implications of the creditor's decision to withdraw the petitions.

The court dismissed the petitions in both matters, NG 7390 of 1997 and NG 7391 of 1997, as a result of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia's decision to withdraw them. No order was made concerning costs in either matter. This decision adhered to the procedural implications of a creditor's voluntary withdrawal of a creditor's petition in the Federal Court of Australia.

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Peter Charles Eady

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

BETWEEN:	COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA Applicant
AND:	PETER CHARLES EADY Respondent

JUDGE:	SACKVILLE J.
DATE:	2 SEPTEMBER 1998
PLACE:	SYDNEY

Solicitor for the Applicant:	L.E. Taylor
Date of Hearing:	2 September, 1998
Date of Judgment:	2 September, 1998