Do and Inspector-General in Bankruptcy

The applicant sought an extension of time to seek a review of a decision made by the Inspector-General in Bankruptcy. The dispute concerned the applicant's bankruptcy and his discharge from it. The matter came before the Tribunal for consideration of whether to exercise its discretion to grant the extension.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant the applicant an extension of time for his application. This involved considering several factors, including the length of the delay, the applicant's explanation for the delay, whether the applicant had taken steps to inform the Inspector-General that he contested the decision, and the substantive merits of the applicant's case.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's explanations for the extensive delay were weak, and this weighed heavily against granting an extension. Furthermore, there was insufficient evidence that the applicant had taken steps to make the Inspector-General aware that he did not accept the decision, which also weighed against the applicant. While the respondent did not present evidence of specific prejudice due to the delay, the Tribunal noted that the historical nature of the matters to be considered could lead to prejudice through loss of memory or access to material. The applicant's submissions on the merits focused on a dispute regarding assets held for a self-managed superannuation fund, which the Tribunal indicated was a matter for the trustee in bankruptcy to determine. The Tribunal noted that the reviewable decision relied on specific failures by the applicant, including a failure to comply with requests for information about property and to provide his passport to the trustee.

The Tribunal was not satisfied that it was reasonable in all the circumstances to extend the time for the applicant to make his application for review.