FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Ferguson v Premier Plasterboard Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1028
File number: SAD 33 of 2018 Judge: WHITE J Date of judgment: 6 July 2018 Catchwords: BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY – application for review of a decision of a Registrar – Registrar dismissed an application to set aside a bankruptcy notice and an application for an extension of time for compliance with a bankruptcy notice – application for review dismissed. Legislation: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s 41
Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 35A(5)
Supreme Court Act 1935 (SA) s 50(4)(a)(ii)
Cases cited: Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Forge [2003] FCAFC 274; (2003) 133 FCR 487
Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Jeans [2005] FCA 978
Corney v Brien (1951) 84 CLR 343
Emmerson v Wreckair Pty Ltd (1992) 33 FCR 581
Harrison v Charalambous [1999] FCA 902
Katter v Melhem (No 2) [2014] FCA 1176; (2014) 319 ALR 646
Re Wong; ex parte Kitson (1979) 27 ALR 405
Date of hearing: 6 July 2018 Registry: South Australia Division: General Division National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations Sub-area: General and Personal Insolvency Category: Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 28 Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant appeared in person Counsel for the Respondents: The Respondents did not appear ORDERS
SAD 33 of 2018 BETWEEN: MICHAEL SHANE FERGUSON
Applicant
AND: PREMIER PLASTERBOARD PTY LTD
First Respondent
INSULATION SA PTY LTD
Second Respondent
JUDGE:
WHITE J
DATE OF ORDER:
6 JULY 2018
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application is dismissed.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
WHITE J:
This judgment concerns an application made under s 35A(5) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) (the FCA Act) for review of a decision of a Registrar made on 31 May 2018.
By that decision, the Registrar dismissed the application of the Applicant seeking the setting aside of a bankruptcy notice or, pursuant to s 41(6A) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), an extension of time for compliance with that bankruptcy notice.
The Applicant was unrepresented before me, as he was in the hearing before the Registrar.
The Respondents to the application are the companies which served the bankruptcy notice. They were represented in the hearing before the Registrar but did not participate in the hearing before me. Their solicitor informed the Court on 3 July 2018 that the Respondents would not attend the hearing.
The hearing before me is a hearing de novo. For the purposes of the review, I had regard to the material which was before the Registrar. In addition, the Applicant tendered a copy of an interlocutory application which he has filed in the Magistrates Court of South Australia to which I will refer again shortly. He informed the Court that that application is to heard on 11 July 2018.
The bankruptcy notice in question was served on the Applicant on 23…
Continue reading Ferguson v Premier Plasterboard Pty Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Ferguson v Premier Plasterboard Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1028
- Case
- [2018] FCA 1028
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether the Registrar's decision to dismiss Ferguson's applications was correct. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether there were any grounds for setting aside the bankruptcy notice and whether there were exceptional circumstances justifying an extension of time for compliance. The court also had to assess whether the Registrar applied the correct legal principles in reaching their decision.
The court found that the Registrar's decision was correct and dismissed the application for review. The court concluded that there were no grounds to set aside the bankruptcy notice, as Ferguson had failed to provide a sufficient explanation for his non-compliance. The court also found that there were no exceptional circumstances warranting an extension of time. The Registrar had correctly applied the relevant legal principles, and thus, the application for review was dismissed.
The court made an order dismissing Ferguson's application for review. This means that the Registrar's original decision to dismiss the application to set aside the bankruptcy notice and the application for an extension of time remains in effect. The matter is concluded with the dismissal of the review application.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application is dismissed.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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.