Quick, William Gary v Stoland Pty Ltd (In the Matter of William Gary Quick)

[1998] FCA 528

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NG 7393 of 1998

BETWEEN:	WILLIAM GARY QUICK Applicant
AND:	STOLAND PTY LIMITED (IN THE MATTER OF WILLIAM GARY QUICK) Respondent

JUDGE:	BURCHETT J
DATE:	12 MAY 1998
PLACE:	SYDNEY

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This is a matter where a judgment was entered for some $240,000-odd.  An appeal was promptly lodged, and I am told is due to be heard at the next sittings of the full court in June and July.  Of course, the lodgment of an appeal does not automatically involve a stay, and in this case, a stay being granted only for a limited period and subject to something in the nature of a Mareva order, the question of further stay was not pursued.  Had it been, I infer it would have been opposed.

Although an appeal does not automatically operate as a stay, it seems to me that, ordinarily, where an appeal is pursued promptly, and is not said to lack bona fides, the fact that an appeal has been lodged should lead to the consequence that any bankruptcy notice issued during its pendency, and which is the subject of an application to set it aside, ought not to be permitted to expire while the debtor is with reasonable expedition pursuing his appeal.

Accordingly, I accede to the application that the debtor's application to set aside the bankruptcy notice be adjourned to a date which is after the expected hearing of the appeal, and that in the meantime the time for compliance with the bankruptcy notice be extended.  It follows from the reasons I have given that I would expect that, if the appeal has not been disposed of by that date but has continued to be pursued without undue delay and bona fide, it would be my intention, should the matter be brought back, to extend the time still further.  But that, of course, would depend on the precise situation that might then obtain.

Accordingly, I extend the time for compliance with the bankruptcy notice to 5 pm on 20 July and stand the matter to that date.  I reserve the costs of today.

I certify that this and the preceding one (1) page are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Burchett

Associate:

Dated:             May 1998

Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr J T Johnson
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Ward Maxwell & Co
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr M Cashion SC
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Kemp Strang
Date of Hearing:	12 May 1998
Date of Judgment:	12 May 1998