Ramirez v Ramirez

[2009] FCA 1033

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Ramirez v Ramirez [2009] FCA 1033

HECTOR ALFONSO RAMIREZ v CARLOS ENRIQUE RAMIREZ

NSD 870 of 2009

COWDROY J
18 SEPTEMBER 2009
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 870 of 2009

BETWEEN:	HECTOR ALFONSO RAMIREZ Applicant
AND:	CARLOS ENRIQUE RAMIREZ Respondent

JUDGE:	COWDROY J
DATE OF ORDER:	18 SEPTEMBER 2009
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve a Notice of Appeal be dismissed.

2.The Applicant pay the costs of the Respondent.

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

The text of entered orders can be located using eSearch on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 870 of 2009

BETWEEN:	HECTOR ALFONSO RAMIREZ Applicant
AND:	CARLOS ENRIQUE RAMIREZ Respondent

JUDGE:	COWDROY J
DATE:	18 SEPTEMBER 2009
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

BACKGROUND

1. By Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal dated 14 August 2009 (the ‘Application’) the applicant seeks leave to file an appeal against a sequestration order made against him on 7 July 2009 by Federal Magistrate Lloyd-Jones. The applicant has sworn an affidavit in support of the Application which was also filed on 14 August 2009.

2. By orders entered on 16 April 2007 in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division (proceedings 3850 of 2001) (‘the Supreme Court orders’) the applicant was ordered to transfer monies from accounts held in the National Australia Bank and St George Bank to Carlos Enrique Ramirez, who is the applicant’s brother and respondent to these proceedings. The Supreme Court proceedings concerned a dispute involving the estate of the applicant’s late mother, Susana Ramirez who died on 18 December 1998 and the respondent. It is the failure of the applicant to comply with the orders of the Supreme Court which have resulted in the bankruptcy proceedings.

   THE APPLICATION

3. The Application has clearly been prepared by the applicant himself. The affidavit filed in support of the Application, sworn by the applicant, states:

   The reason why not apply on time my application appeal.

   Becouse [sic] I was complete ignorant of the procedures.

   May [sic] sincerelly [sic] apology.

4. The Draft Notice of Appeal attached to the affidavit provides as grounds of appeal:

   1.    I annul bankruptcy

   2.    Paying only to Carlos Enrique Ramirez $25,119.85

   3.    Conspiracy from the legal representants [sic] of the respondent

5. Attached to the affidavit in support are documents which were part of the evidence provided to the Federal Magistrates Court. It includes a history of the litigation supplied by the applicant together with bank statements in respect of accounts he holds with the National Australia Bank and St George Bank.

6. The appellant appeared before the Court unrepresented but with the assistance of an interpreter. At the outset of the Application the applicant inquired whether the respondent was in Court. Since no application for…