Pattison, Paul a (as Trustee of the Property of Gabor Horvath and Anor, Bankrupts) v Horvath, Gabor

Case [1998] FCA 960


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

 VG 7812 of 1997

BETWEEN:

PAUL A PATTISON (AS TRUSTEE OF THE PROPERTY OF GABOR HORVATH AND AGOTA HORVATH, BANKRUPTS)
APPLICANT

AND:

GABOR HORVATH
FIRST RESPONDENT

AGOTA HORVATH
SECOND RESPONDENT

GABOR HORVATH JUNIOR
THIRD RESPONDENT

JULIJANA IVEGES
FOURTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

HEEREY J

DATE:

6 AUGUST 1998

PLACE:

MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Amongst the property seized at the premises of the bankrupt were a number of pistols.  These have now been placed in the custody of a licensed firearms dealer who holds them on behalf of the trustee, awaiting further directions.  The bankrupts claim the pistols.  Mrs Horvath deposed as follows:

“Those pistols are registered in my Husbands [sic] name Gabor Horvath and solely used by him for target shooting as he has been a member of the Pistol Club since 1973.  Most of the Pistols are very old.  They only have sentimental value.”

I accept this evidence. However, it does not take the pistols outside the definition of property divisible amongst creditors. Section 116(1) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) provides:

“Subject to this Act:

(a)all property that belonged to, or was vested in, a bankrupt at the commencement of the bankruptcy, or has been acquired or is acquired by him or her, or has devolved or devolves on him or her, after the commencement of the bankruptcy and before his or her discharge;

is property divisible amongst the creditors of the bankrupt”.

There are a number of exceptions but none are applicable in the present case since there is no doubt that the pistols were the property of Mr Horvath.  It must follow that they are included in the property divisible amongst his creditors.  I will therefore make orders in terms of the minutes which authorise the dealer to sell the firearms on behalf of the applicant.  I will make an order in terms of the minutes which I will initial and place on the file.

I certify that this and the preceding page are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Heerey

Associate:

Dated:            6 August 1998           

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr S Glacken
Solicitor for the Applicant: Coltmans Price Brent
Counsel for the Respondents: In person
Date of Hearing: 6 August 1998
Date of Judgment: 6 August 1998
Details
AGLC
Pattison, Paul a (as Trustee of the Property of Gabor Horvath and Anor, Bankrupts) v Horvath, Gabor [1998] FCA 960
Case
[1998] FCA 960
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Federal Court of Australia involved the seizure of several pistols from the premises of the bankrupt, Gabor Horvath. The pistols were placed in the custody of a licensed firearms dealer pending further directions. The bankrupts sought to reclaim ownership of the pistols, arguing that they had sentimental value and were solely used by Gabor for target shooting. The court had to determine whether the pistols were property divisible amongst the creditors of the bankrupt.

The primary legal issue was whether the pistols, which were registered in Gabor's name and used for target shooting, were exempt from being classified as divisible property under the Bankruptcy Act 1966. Section 116(1) of the Act defines all property belonging to or vested in a bankrupt as property divisible amongst the creditors, unless an exception applies. The court had to consider if any of the exceptions to this rule applied in this case.

Justice Heerey found that the pistols were indeed property belonging to Gabor Horvath and therefore were subject to division among his creditors. The sentimental value and intended use of the pistols for target shooting did not exempt them from the definition of divisible property. Consequently, the court ordered that the firearms be sold on behalf of the applicant, the trustee of Gabor and Agata Horvath's bankruptcy. This decision was made on 6 August 1998.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.