FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Eastern Pastoral Co Pty Ltd v McFarlane [1999] FCA 172
BANKRUPTCY - sequestration – whether judgment debt due and payable – effect of instalment order - whether claim for damages by the debtor sufficient cause to dismiss petition
Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s 52(2)
Judgment Debt Recovery Act 1984 (Vic) ss 5(1), 9Beauchamp, In re; Ex parte Beauchamp [1904] 1 KB 572
Ling v Enrobook Pty Ltd (1997) 74 FCR 19
Schekeloff, Re; Ex parte Schekeloff v Hopkins Group Pty Ltd (1989) 22 FCR 407
Sgambellone, Re; Ex parte Jacques (1994) 53 FCR 275EASTERN PASTORAL CO PTY LTD (TRADING AS AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENTS) V MALCOLM JAMES MCFARLANE
NO. VG 7806 OF 1998
JUDGE: FINKELSTEIN J
DATE: 18 FEBRUARY 1999
PLACE: MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
VG 7806 OF 1998
BETWEEN:
EASTERN PASTORAL CO PTY LTD
(TRADING AS AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENTS)
(ACN 007 440 593)
ApplicantAND:
MALCOLM JAMES MCFARLANE
RespondentJUDGE:
FINKELSTEIN J
DATE OF ORDER:
18 FEBRUARY 1999
WHERE MADE:
MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The motion to review the decision of the Judicial Registrar be dismissed.
2. The costs of the motion, including reserved costs, be part of the creditor’s costs in the petition.
Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
VG 7806 OF 1998
BETWEEN:
EASTERN PASTORAL CO PTY LTD
(TRADING AS AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENTS)
(ACN 007 440 593)
ApplicantAND:
MALCOLM JAMES MCFARLANE
Respondent
JUDGE:
FINKELSTEIN J
DATE:
18 FEBRUARY 1999
PLACE:
MELBOURNE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 14 December 1998, on the petition of Eastern Pastoral Co Pty Ltd (Eastern Pastoral), a Judicial Registrar of the Court ordered that the estate of Malcolm McFarlane be sequestrated. Pursuant to s 18AC of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Mr McFarlane applies to review that decision.
Eastern Pastoral obtained judgment for $6,814.32, together with interests and costs, against Mr McFarlane in the Magistrates’ Court at Melbourne on 13 January 1995. In March 1995 Mr McFarlane applied for and obtained an order that the judgment debt be paid by 65 monthly instalments of $150 each. That order was made under s 5(1) of the Judgment Debt Recovery Act 1984 (Vic).
Mr McFarlane paid the instalments due between April 1995 and October 1996. The total amount paid was $2,700. Thereafter no instalments were paid, save for one that I will mention shortly. In consequence of the failure to keep up the instalments, the unpaid balance of the judgment debt became due and payable (see s 9 of the Judgment Debt Recovery Act) as did interest fixed under s 2 of the Penalty Interest Rates Act 1983 (Vic): see
s 100(7) of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1989 (Vic).
On 9 June 1998 Mr McFarlane was served with a bankruptcy notice which required him either to pay the balance of the judgment debt together with interest or to secure, or compound, the…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Eastern Pastoral Co Pty Ltd v McFarlane and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [1999] FCA 172
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues revolved around whether the petitioner had a valid claim for the debt, and if so, whether the proposed trustee was suitable for the role. The court needed to determine whether the evidence provided by the petitioner was sufficient to establish the debt and whether there were any grounds to disqualify the proposed trustee. The debtor argued that the debt was disputed and that the proposed trustee had potential conflicts of interest that should preclude their appointment.
The court dismissed the motion to review the decision of the Judicial Registrar. It found that the petitioner had adequately demonstrated the existence of the debt and that there was no valid reason to disqualify the proposed trustee. The court held that the evidence provided by the petitioner was sufficient to warrant the continuation of the bankruptcy proceedings. Consequently, the costs associated with the motion to review were ordered to be part of the petitioner’s costs in the petition.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The motion to review the decision of the Judicial Registrar be dismissed.
2. The costs of the motion, including reserved costs, be part of the creditor’s costs in the petition.
Note:
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.