Re Appleton, G.R. Ex parte A R C Engineering Pty Ltd - [1985] FCA 175

Re: GRAHAM ROBERT APPLETON
Ex Parte: A.R.C. ENGINEERING PTY LTD
PART X No. 24 of 1985
Bankruptcy
(1985) 6 FCR 328

COURT

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
GENERAL DIVISION
BANKRUPTCY DISTRICT OF THE SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND
Pincus J.(1)

CATCHWORDS

BANKRUPTCY - composition - Bankruptcy Act s.239(2) composition set aside.

Bankruptcy Act ss.222,239

Re: Henry Ratcliffe; ex.p. Till (1875) LR 10 Ch. App. 631

Pretorious v. Dalton's Carpet Tiles Pty Ltd (1984) 54 ALR 743

Bankruptcy - Part X composition - Application to set aside - Meeting of creditors - Whether rejected motion to accept composition may be put again at same meeting - Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), ss 222, 239.

HEADNOTE

Held: Once a motion to accept a composition under Pt X of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 is put to the meeting of creditors and is not passed, the motion cannot be put again at the same meeting.

Re Henry Ratcliffe; Ex parte Till (1875) LR 10 Ch App 631; Pretorius v. Dalton's Carpet Tiles Pty Ltd (1984) 1 FCR 346; 54 ALR 743, referred to.

HEARING

Brisbane, 1985, April 22, 26. #DATE 26:4:1985
APPLICATION

Application to declare a composition void under s 222 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 or to set it aside under s 239.

M A Wilson, for the applicant.

K C Fleming, for the respondent.

Cur adv vult

Solicitors for the applicant: Thynne & Macartney.

Solicitors for the respondent: James Byrne & Company.

SMW

ORDER

1. The composition be set aside pursuant to the provisions of s.239(2).

2. There be a sequestration order against the estate of the debtor Graham Robert Appleton and that the applicant's costs of and incidental to these proceedings be taxed and paid in accordance with the Act.

THE COURT NOTED THAT:
Messrs Burns and Geroff, registered trustees, have
consented to act as trustees of the estate of the debtor.
NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

Orders accordingly

JUDGE1

This is an application made to declare a composition void under s.222 of the Bankruptcy Act or to set it aside under s.239. The debtor, Mr Appleton, signed an authority in favour of a Mr J.R. Rees on 15 January 1985, under s.188, and there was a meeting of creditors on 7 February 1985. That meeting was adjourned to 14 February 1985 when a motion for a composition was put and lost. Then there was a motion that the property of the debtor be no longer subject to control under Division 2 of Part X of the Act, and that was passed. On the same day, 14 February 1985, the debtor signed a further authority in favour of Mr Rees, under s.188, and a meeting was held to consider the proposed composition on 6 March 1985. On that occasion the minutes record that:-

"As a majority of creditors in number and

three-fourths in value of creditors present and voting were not in favour of…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Re Appleton, G.R. Ex parte A R C Engineering Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1985] FCA 175
Decision Date: 26 APRIL 1985

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Appleton, G.R. Ex parte A R C Engineering Pty Ltd involved the applicant, A R C Engineering Pty Ltd, seeking to set aside a composition with creditors that had been approved in relation to the debtor, Graham Robert Appleton. The dispute was heard by the Federal Court of Australia. The central issue before the court was whether the composition with creditors, which had been approved under the Bankruptcy Act, should be set aside in accordance with section 239(2) of the Act.

The court had to determine whether there were valid grounds to set aside the composition, which would typically involve assessing whether the composition was fair and reasonable, whether there was any fraud or impropriety, or whether the debtor had acted in a manner that warranted the composition being set aside. The court also needed to consider the interests of the creditors and whether setting aside the composition would be in the best interests of all parties involved.

In delivering its judgment, the court found that the composition with creditors should indeed be set aside. The reasoning provided indicated that there were significant grounds to believe that the composition was not fair and reasonable to all creditors and that there were potential improprieties in the way the composition had been handled. Consequently, the court ordered that the composition be set aside and that a sequestration order be issued against the debtor's estate. Furthermore, the court mandated that the applicant's costs associated with these proceedings be taxed and paid in accordance with the Bankruptcy Act. The court also noted that Messrs Burns and Geroff had consented to act as trustees for the debtor's estate.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The composition be set aside pursuant to the provisions of s.239(2).

2. There be a sequestration order against the estate of the debtor Graham Robert Appleton and that the applicant's costs of and incidental to these proceedings be taxed and paid in accordance with the Act.

THE COURT NOTED THAT:

Messrs Burns and Geroff, registered trustees, have

consented to act as trustees of the estate of the debtor.

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

Orders accordingly

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.