Michell (Trustee) v Sinnott, in the matter of Sinnott

In this case, the applicant, acting as a trustee of the bankrupt’s estate, sought various orders in relation to a property that had vested in the trustee upon the respondent’s bankruptcy. The application was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The principal issues were whether the court should declare the property vested in the applicant, order the respondent to vacate the property and deliver up keys and titles, and authorise the sale of the property and any personal property not removed.

The court considered the evidence and submissions from both parties. The applicant had provided detailed affidavits and documentation, and the respondent had not participated in the proceedings. The court noted that while the applicant sought a declaration that he was the beneficial owner of the property, there was no utility in making such a declaration as the property had already vested in the trustee. However, the court found that the applicant was entitled to the other orders sought, as they were necessary to enable the sale of the property and recovery of funds for the bankrupt’s estate.

Accordingly, the court made orders for the applicant to exercise a power of sale, for the respondent to vacate the property and deliver up keys and titles, for the applicant to conduct the sale of the property and any personal property not removed, and for the net proceeds of the sale to be paid to the bankrupt’s estate. The court also ordered that a copy of the orders be served on the registered mortgagee of the property.

The court declined to make a standalone order for costs, as the orders already provided for the recovery of costs from the net proceeds of the sale. The applicant did not press for a separate order for costs at the hearing.

In summary, while the court did not make the declaratory relief sought by the applicant, it granted most of the other orders sought in the application to facilitate the sale of the property and recovery of funds for the bankrupt’s estate. The respondent did not participate in the proceedings and did not seek any adjournment or make submissions.