Duhs v PETTETT (No.2)
[2009] FMCA 1313
•11 December 2009
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| DUHS v PETTETT (No.2) | [2009] FMCA 1313 |
| BANKRUPTCY – Adjournment of petition where debtor alleges he has filed debtor’s petition. |
| Applicant: | WILFRED HENRY DUHS |
| Respondent: | TREVOR PETTETT |
| File Number: | BRG 595 of 2009 |
| Judgment of: | Wilson FM |
| Hearing date: | 11 December 2009 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 11 December 2009 |
| Delivered at: | Brisbane |
| Delivered on: | 11 December 2009 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | N/A |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Ferguson Cannon |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | N/A |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | N/A |
ORDERS
That this matter be adjourned to 9.30am 29 January 2010 in the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia at Brisbane.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE |
BRG 595 of 2009
| WILFRED HENRY DUHS |
Applicant
And
| TREVOR PETTETT |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In this matter the applicant has presented a creditor’s petition seeking a sequestration order against the estate of the respondent. That arises from the respondent’s failure to comply with a Bankruptcy Notice served on 16 July 2009 which in turn was based on a judgment of the Supreme Court of Queensland given for in excess of $2.7 million. The matter has been previously adjourned to permit the respondent to prosecute an appeal against that judgment on 6 November 2009.
On 6 November 2009 the Court of Appeal dismissed both an appeal against the judgment and a cross-appeal in relation to certain procedural matters. In those circumstances the applicant wishes to proceed with its creditor’s petition, however, it came to the applicant’s solicitor’s notice yesterday afternoon that the respondent contends that he has presented a debtor’s petition thereby making himself bankrupt. If that is correct, the power of this court to make a sequestration order is circumscribed. The applicant wishes to investigate: (a) whether a debtor’s petition was presented; and (b) the trustee who was appointed to administer the respondent’s estate.
The applicant wishes to give consideration to what further steps it takes in this matter. It seeks to adjourn the petition to a date in late January. That seems to me to be an appropriate course and I adjourn the creditor’s petition to 9.30 am on 29 January 2010.
I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Wilson FM
Associate: Lynnette Chin
Date: 25 January 2010
0
0
0