Peden v Little

William John Peden sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria, which had dismissed his appeal from the County Court. Peden had sued John Little and other members of a church committee to recover £60, based on a written order given to him by a contractor, John Diwell. Diwell had contracted to perform repairs on the church for a total sum, and had arranged with Peden to undertake a portion of the work and advance moneys and materials. To secure Peden, Diwell had provided the committee with an order to pay Peden £60 from the balance due to Diwell upon completion of the contract.

The central legal issue before the courts was whether the written order constituted an assignment of a "book debt" within the meaning of the *Book Debts Act 1896* (Vic.). If it was a book debt, the further issue arose as to whether the Act required registration for such an assignment to be valid, and whether the Act applied to an assignment of a portion of a single debt. The County Court had found the assignment void for non-registration, a decision upheld by the Supreme Court.

The applicant argued that a single sum of money to become due in the future under a contract was not a "book debt" as defined by the Act, and that section 3 of the Act did not apply to the assignment of part of a single debt. However, the High Court, in refusing special leave to appeal, did not provide detailed reasons for its decision. The Court simply stated that it was not a case for special leave.

Special leave to appeal was refused.