Mastronardo v Commonwealth Bank of Australia Limited

In the case of Mastronardo v Commonwealth Bank of Australia Limited, the applicants sought to set aside bankruptcy notices on the basis that the judgments were not attached to the notices. The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia was required to determine two key legal issues: whether the Full Court was bound to follow a previous decision of a differently constituted Full Court and whether the judgments had to be attached to the bankruptcy notices.

The Court found that it was generally bound to follow an earlier decision of a previous Full Court unless that decision was considered to be "clearly erroneous". This principle was based on the doctrine of precedent, which is fundamental to the common law. The Court held that it was a power which should be exercised with great care, and that decisions of a Full Court were entitled to due respect and would not be lightly departed from. The Court concluded that there was no basis for concluding that the earlier decision was clearly erroneous. Furthermore, the Court found that a copy of the judgment did not need to be attached to a bankruptcy notice in order to comply with the statutory requirements. The purpose of attaching a copy of the judgment was to unequivocally bring to the attention of the bankrupt the judgment upon which reliance was being placed by the petitioning creditor.

In light of the above, the Court dismissed the appeals and ordered that the applicants pay the costs of the respondents. The Court emphasised that its decision was based on the established principle of precedent and the statutory requirements of the Bankruptcy Act and the Bankruptcy Regulations. The Court also noted that the need for a judgment to be "attached" to a bankruptcy notice was not a strict requirement, and that the purpose of attaching a copy of the judgment was to bring to the attention of the bankrupt the judgment upon which reliance was being placed by the petitioning creditor.