EDLEBI v Vero Insurance Limited

[2005] FMCA 536

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

EDLEBI v VERO INSURANCE LIMITED [2005] FMCA 536

BANKRUPTCY – Application for review of a sequestration order – where the applicant did not attend.

Applicant debtor: SUZY EDLEBI

Respondent: VERO INSURANCE LIMITED

File Number: SYG 2919 of 2004

Judgment of: Raphael FM

Hearing date: 21 April 2005

Date of Last Submission: 21 April 2005

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 21 April 2005

REPRESENTATION

Solicitor for the Trustee: Ms Britton

Solicitor for the Respondent: Mr Lipp

ORDERS

1. The application for review should is dismissed

2. The applicant is to pay the costs of the petitioning creditor and of the trustee, to be taxed if not agreed, pursuant to the Federal Court Act and Rules.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 2919 of 2004

SUZY EDLEBI

Applicant

And

VERO INSURANCE LIMITED

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These proceedings, which are for the review of a sequestration order, were adjourned until today at the request of the applicant. Some short time ago a telephone call was made to my associate by the bankrupt, who informed her that she, the bankrupt, did not intend to proceed with this application.  There was, however, no formal notification to that effect.

2. Today a solicitor for the petitioning creditor and for the trustee appeared in court.  I was advised by Mr Lipp that he had earlier today appeared in the Local Court of New South Wales on the bankrupt's application to set aside the judgment debt upon which the bankruptcy petition was based.  He tells me that the bankrupt did not appear at that application, and it was dismissed.  The bankrupt has not appeared today in this court. 

3. In those circumstances it is appropriate that her application for review should be dismissed and that she be ordered to pay the costs of the petitioning creditor and of the trustee, to be taxed if not agreed, pursuant to the Federal Court Act and Rules.

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM

Associate: 

Date: