Pioneer Credit Acquisition Services Pty Ltd v Hayes
[2017] FCCA 2821
•7 September 2017
FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| PIONEER CREDIT ACQUISITION SERVICES PTY LTD v HAYES | [2017] FCCA 2821 |
| Catchwords: BANKRUPTCY – Application for sequestration order. |
| Legislation: Bankruptcy Act 1966, ss.52(2), 52(4) |
| Cases cited: Adams v Lambert [2006] FCA 623 |
| Applicant: | PIONEER CREDIT ACQUISITION SERVICES PTY LTD |
| Respondent: | BRETT JOHN HAYES |
| File Number: | BRG 762 of 2015 |
| Judgment of: | Judge Jarrett |
| Hearing date: | 7 September 2017 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 7 September 2017 |
| Delivered at: | Brisbane |
| Delivered on: | 7 September 2017 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr Messina |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Results Legal Solutions Pty Ltd |
| The Respondent appeared in person |
ORDERS
A sequestration order be made against the estate of BRETT JOHN HAYES.
The petitioning creditor’s costs of and incidental to the creditor’s petition be taxed and paid in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Circuit Court (Bankruptcy) Rules 2006.
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE |
BRG 762 of 2015
| PIONEER CREDIT ACQUISITION SERVICES PTY LTD |
Applicant
And
| BRETT JOHN HAYES |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In this application I am satisfied that the respondent, Brett John Hayes was served with a bankruptcy notice on 13 July, 2015.
The evidence satisfies me that he has not complied with the bankruptcy notice. I am satisfied that he was served with the creditor’s petition in this matter which was filed some time ago now on 25 August, 2015.
Counsel for the creditor has quite properly brought to my attention that the creditors petition in ordinary circumstances would have lapsed by reason of s.52(2) and (4) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966. But in the circumstances of this particular case and having regard to the decision of Giles J in Adams v Lambert [2006] FCA 623, the creditors petition has not lapsed notwithstanding that it was filed or presented more than 12 months ago. In those circumstances the creditors’ petition is still valid.
I am satisfied that the respondent debtor still owes to the creditor a debt having regard to the affidavit of debt of Ms Cook. I am satisfied of the other formal requirements of which I need to be satisfied under s.52 of the Bankruptcy Act. I am not satisfied that there is any good reason not to make a sequestration order and I make a sequestration order against the estate of Brett John Hayes in the usual terms.
I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Jarrett
Associate:
Date: 21 November 2017