Lauro v Leopardi

This matter concerned an application by Mr Lauro for a review of the estimation of a debt made by a trustee in bankruptcy. The debt in question was subject to the outcome of District Court proceedings that had not yet been finalised. Mrs Anna Leopardi was substituted as the first respondent for the late Vincenzo Leopardi.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the trustee's estimation of the contingent debt was appropriate, particularly given that the underlying debt was still being litigated. The court was required to consider the provisions of section 82(4) of the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth) in determining how to deal with a debt that was contingent and unliquidated.

Judge Brown directed the applicant to file an amended application and supporting evidence addressing specific errors alleged to have been committed by the trustee in adjudicating the quantity of the contingent debt, or alternatively, outlining the procedure the court should adopt to assess the amount and proof of the debt. The applicant was also required to specify the evidence and witnesses they proposed to rely on. The respondent was to file a response and affidavit in support, with further consideration adjourned for directions. Costs were reserved.