Jobbins v Capel Court Corporation Ltd

[1989] FCA 538

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA	1
)
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	) No. NP 2716 )
BANKRUPTCY DIVISION	1
RE: ROSS J. ALGIE
8 AUGUST 1989

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

LOCKHART J.:

This matter has a fairly lengthy history which I reviewed on 11 July 1989 when it was last before the Court. The petition was then adjourned until today but upon the Court imposing certain conditions of the adjournment, which I need not reiterate, save to say that the first condition which was the key condition was that the debtor appoint a registered trustee in bankruptcy to examine his financial affairs who could then report the position on those affairs to the Court.

That condition was not complied with. It appears that yesterday the debtor spoke to a registered trustee in bankruptcy who saw him this morning and it is possible or perhaps likely that within a period of 7 to 10 days or thereabouts the trustee would be able to sufficiently examine the financial affairs of the debtor to prepare an appropriate

report on them for the Court.

It was with reluctance that I granted the adjournment on the last occasion in all the circumstances then mentioned and imposed the conditions upon the adjournment. Non compliance with the conditions is a matter which counsel who appears for the debtor fairly says could not be the subject of any probative material that would assist in the matter. I have no evidence as to why the condition numbered l(a) was not complied with. It follows therefore that the other condition of l(b) cannot be complied with and nor could l(d) in those circumstances. Condition l(b) was not complied with technically in that the requisite notices referred to were not sent out until later, but I do not attach any significance to that matter for present purposes.

It may be that if the matter is adjourned for a period of some two weeks as is sought on behalf of the debtor that there would be a report from Mr Sherlock, the registered trustee who has been approached by the debtor, and that something may emerge from that which would throw light upon what the fate of the petition should be. However, in the

light of the history of the matter as reviewed on 11 July and

in light of the fact that there has been non-compliance with

the fundamental conditions imposed on the adjournment of the application for a sequestration the present application for adjournment should in the exercise of the Court's discretion be refused.

Accordingly, I refuse the application for adjournment and the petition shall proceed.

I certify that this and the preceding two (2) pages are a true copy of the reasons for judgment herein of the Honourable Mr. Justice Lockhart.

I

Associate

Dated:  8 August 1989

Counsel for the Applicant (Debtor):  Mr. G. Whitlam

Solicitor for the Applicant:  Forshaws

Solicitor for the Respondent	Australian Government
(Petitioning Creditor):	Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	8 August 1989
Date of Judgment:	8 August 1989