McDonald v Neffati (No.2)

In *McDonald v Neffati (No.2)*, the applicant, Mr. McDonald, sought an interlocutory order for the preservation of assets against the respondent, Mr. Neffati. The dispute arose in the context of bankruptcy proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant an interlocutory order for the preservation of assets. This involved considering the principles governing such orders, particularly in the context of potential dissipation of assets by a bankrupt. A secondary issue concerned the admissibility and weight of a certificate issued under section 128A of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) in support of the application.

Judge Street reasoned that the court had the power to make orders for the preservation of assets under the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth) where it was necessary to prevent the frustration of the bankruptcy process. The court applied the principles that such orders should only be granted where there is a real risk of dissipation of assets and where the applicant has demonstrated a sufficient likelihood of success in the underlying proceedings. The court also considered the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) in relation to the certificate, noting its evidentiary value.

The court made orders preserving the assets in question.