Fuller, Michael John v Wily, Hugh Jenner

The Federal Court of Australia was asked to decide if the respondent, Hugh Jenner Wily, should be removed as the trustee of the bankrupt, Michael John Fuller. The appellant claimed that the respondent had acted improperly by not appealing a judgment against him, and that this warranted his removal as trustee. The primary judge had dismissed the appellant's application to remove the respondent as trustee, and the appellant appealed this decision. The Court of Appeal considered the evidence and arguments presented, including the respondent's decision-making process regarding the appeal, and the potential conflict of interest with the solicitors for the major creditors. The Court found that, while the respondent could have handled the situation better by seeking independent advice and notifying other creditors, his decision not to appeal was reasonable given the circumstances. The Court ultimately dismissed the appeal and upheld the primary judge's decision, with the appellant to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.