Cottrell v Nicholls (Trustee) in the matter of Cottrell (Bankrupt) Summary

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Cottrell v Nicholls (Trustee) in the matter of Cottrell (Bankrupt) [2004] FCA 315
DAVID M COTTRELL v ALAN NICHOLLS (AS TRUSTEE IN THE ESTATE OF DAVID M COTTRELL A BANKRUPT)
N 7880 of 2000
ALLSOP J
24 March 2004
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 7880 of 2000

BETWEEN:

DAVID M COTTRELL
APPLICANT

AND:

ALAN NICHOLLS (TRUSTEE)
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

ALLSOP J

DATE OF ORDER:

24 March 2004

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pursuant to Order 35 rule 7(2)(e) of the Federal Court Rules order 2 made on 16 March 2004 in this matter be amended by replacing the date 19 September 2001 with the date 21 September 2001.

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

N 7880 of 2000

BETWEEN:

DAVID M COTTRELL
APPLICANT

AND:

ALAN NICHOLLS (TRUSTEE)
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

ALLSOP J

DATE:

24 MARCH 2004

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

On 27 February 2004 I made orders and published reasons in this matter. Later, on 16 March 2004 I made final orders. During the course of my reasons I attempted to set out, chronologically all that had happened, relevantly, in relation to the application. In [13] I indicated that on 19 September 2001 Conti J was once again heard the review from the orders of Registrar Tessoriero. That was accurate. However, in error, which was mine, I thereafter in the orders made on 16 March 2004 referred to the orders made by Conti J on 19 September 2001. While Conti J heard the matter on 19 September 2001, his Honour made the orders on 21 September 2001 which orders were entered on 7 January 2002. Thus, there has been an error by way of a slip and it is plain that my orders of 16 March should be amended such that order 2 should contain the date 21 September 2001 and not 19 September 2001. I will make orders accordingly.
The orders of the Court are that:
1.Pursuant to Order 35 rule 7(2)(e) of the Federal Court Rules order 2 made on 16 March 2004 in this matter be amended by replacing the date 19 September 2001 with the date 21 September 2001.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop.
Associate:
Dated: 24 March 2004

Date of Judgment: 24 March 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved a dispute between Cottrell, the bankrupt, and Nicholls, the trustee of the bankruptcy estate. The matter was heard in the Federal Court, where the trustee sought to amend an earlier order to reflect a correction in the date of an event pertinent to the bankruptcy proceedings. The issue at hand was whether the Federal Court had the jurisdiction to amend an earlier order to correct a typographical error in the date of a specified event, which was originally recorded as 19 September 2001, but should have been 21 September 2001. The court considered the provisions of the Federal Court Rules, particularly Order 35 rule 7(2)(e), which allows for the amendment of orders to correct errors.

The court examined the scope of its inherent jurisdiction to correct errors in its records and orders, balancing this against the need to maintain the integrity and finality of judicial decisions. It acknowledged that while courts generally have the power to correct obvious errors, this must be exercised judiciously to avoid undermining the principles of legal certainty and finality. The court also considered the potential impact on the parties and the administration of justice if the error were to remain uncorrected. Ultimately, the court concluded that the error was indeed obvious and that correcting it would not prejudice the rights of the parties or disrupt the administration of the estate.

In light of these considerations, the court ruled that it had the jurisdiction to amend the earlier order to correct the typographical error. The amendment was made to accurately reflect the date of the specified event as 21 September 2001. The court’s decision was based on the balance between the need for accuracy in judicial records and the importance of maintaining the finality of its orders. The court ordered that Order 35 rule 7(2)(e) of the Federal Court Rules order 2, made on 16 March 2004, be amended by replacing the date 19 September 2001 with the date 21 September 2001.

Orders of the court

1. Pursuant to Order 35 rule 7(2)(e) of the Federal Court Rules order 2 made on 16 March 2004 in this matter be amended by replacing the date 19 September 2001 with the date 21 September 2001.

Cottrell v Nicholls (Trustee) in the matter of Cottrell (Bankrupt)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 7880 of 2000

BETWEEN:	DAVID M COTTRELL APPLICANT
AND:	ALAN NICHOLLS (TRUSTEE) RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER:	24 March 2004
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

JUDGE:	ALLSOP J
DATE:	24 MARCH 2004
PLACE:	SYDNEY