Perrett v Ray

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Perrett v Ray [2007] FCA 1920

PAUL JOHN PERRETT v GREG RAY

NSD 2141 OF 2007

LINDGREN J
27 NOVEMBER 2007
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 2141 OF 2007

BETWEEN:	PAUL JOHN PERRETT Applicant
AND:	GREG RAY Respondent

JUDGE:	LINDGREN J
DATE OF ORDER:	27 NOVEMBER 2007
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application brought by notice of motion filed on 29 October 2007 be dismissed.

2.The applicant, Paul John Perrett, pay the costs of the respondent, Greg Ray, of the proceeding on the indemnity basis. 

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 2141 OF 2007

BETWEEN:	PAUL JOHN PERRETT Applicant
AND:	GREG RAY Respondent

JUDGE:	LINDGREN J
DATE:	27 NOVEMBER 2007
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. By a notice of motion filed on 29 October 2007 the applicant (Mr Perrett) seeks leave to appeal from orders made by Graham J in proceeding NSD 1975 of 2007 on 26 October 2007 (see Ray v Perrett [2007] FCA 1672). His Honour dismissed a motion brought by Mr Perrett seeking interlocutory orders and ordered that Mr Perrett pay Mr Ray’s costs of the motion on an indemnity basis.

2. An application for leave to appeal from an interlocutory order of the Court is made in the Court’s appellate jurisdiction under s 24(1A) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and O 52 r 10 of the Federal Court Rules.  The order made by Graham J dismissing Mr Perrett’s motion was an interlocutory order.

3. According to the notice of motion by which he brings his present application for leave to appeal, Mr Perrett seeks the following orders:

   1.Leave be given to appeal the interlocutory decision to refuse to grant to the applicant the right to choose whomsoever he desires to be his advocate in bankruptcy, by reference to s 308(d) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 by Justice Peter Ross Graham on the 26^th October 2007.

   2.Leave be given to appeal the interlocutory decision of Justice Peter Ross Graham, refusing to grant a jury trial to the respondent on the same day.

   3.That the matter be heard by a Full Court in compliance with s 24 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976.

4. The notice of motion is supported by an affidavit by Mr Perrett sworn on 29 October 2007, the date on which the notice of motion was filed. 

5. It is not necessary to give many of the background facts.  Proceeding NSD 1975 of 2007 is a bankruptcy proceeding in which Mr Ray seeks a sequestration order.  The alleged act of bankruptcy is Mr Perrett’s failure to comply with a bankruptcy notice.   The bankruptcy notice was based on an order that Mr Perrett pay Mr Ray’s costs associated with the discontinuance by Mr Perrett as against Mr Ray of a proceeding…