Re Harris, Graeme John Ex Parte Harris, Graeme John - [1997] FCA 627

CATCHWORDS

BANKRUPTCY - notice of objection to automatic discharge from bankruptcy - question of law involved in form and content of notice of objection - grounds of objection - whether evidence relied on adequately set out - challenge to evidence relied on - whether reason for objection adequately set out

Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) ss 149, 149A, 149B, 149C, 149D(1)(g)

Van Reesema v Official Receiver in Bankruptcy [1983] 50 ALR 253
Re Ansett; Ex parte Ansett v Pattison [1995] 56 FCR 526
Re Hall [1994] 14 ACSR 488
Re Ellis; Ex parte Jefferson (unreported, Drummond J, 17 February 1995)

Re GRAEME JOHN HARRIS; Ex parte GRAEME JOHN HARRIS and OFFICIAL TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY
No. NB 429 of 1993

EINFELD J
SYDNEY
6 JUNE 1997

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No.NB429 of 1993
BANKRUPTCY DIVISION )

Re:GRAEME JOHN HARRIS

Bankrupt

Ex parte:GRAEME JOHN HARRIS

Applicant

And:OFFICIAL TRUSTEE In BANKRUPTCY

Respondent

MINUTE OF ORDERS

The Court orders that:

The application be dismissed.

The trustee’s costs of and pertaining to this application, including any reserved costs, be paid by the bankrupt.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders are dealt with in accordance with Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
EINFELD J
SYDNEY
6 JUNE 1997

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No.NB429 of 1993
BANKRUPTCY DIVISION )

Re:GRAEME JOHN HARRIS

Bankrupt

Ex parte:GRAEME JOHN HARRIS

Applicant

And: OFFICIAL TRUSTEE IN
BANKRUPTCY

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

EINFELD J SYDNEY 6 JUNE 1997

Introduction

This is an application by Dr Graeme John Harris (the bankrupt) for declarations that the notice of objection lodged to prevent his automatic discharge from bankruptcy is invalid and consequently that he was discharged on 7 April 1996 pursuant to section 149 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (the Act). The bankrupt also seeks orders that the records of the Registrar in Bankruptcy be amended to reflect these declarations. It was for this reason that the Registrar in Bankruptcy was joined as a party in these proceedings. In the event that the bankrupt’s application is successful, orders will be made that may require some registry records to be amended. However, it is completely unnecessary for the Registrar to be joined as a party for such orders to take effect. Consequently I order that the Registrar in Bankruptcy be struck out as a respondent.

The applicant was made bankrupt on 24 February 1993 upon the making of a sequestration order against his estate. He filed his statement of affairs on 7 April 1993. In the normal course of events, section 149(4) of the Act would have operated to bring about his automatic discharge from bankruptcy 3 years later. However, a notice of objection (the notice) was lodged by the Official Receiver, on behalf of the Official Trustee as trustee of the bankrupt’s estate (the trustee) in accordance with section 149B of the Act, the effect of which in this particular…

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 Harris, Graeme John Ex Parte Harris, Graeme John 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: [1997] FCA 627
Decision Date: 6 JUNE 1997

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Dr Graeme John Harris (the bankrupt) applied to the Federal Court of Australia to declare the notice of objection to his automatic discharge from bankruptcy invalid, and for orders that the Registrar in Bankruptcy amend the records accordingly. The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy, who lodged the notice, opposed the application. The case involved the interpretation of section 149C of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), which sets out the requirements for a notice of objection to be valid. The primary legal issue was whether the notice of objection lodged by the Official Trustee in Bankruptcy complied with the statutory requirements of section 149C(1). The Court considered three main aspects of the notice: the grounds of objection, the evidence relied on, and the reasons for the objection.

The Court held that the notice of objection was valid as it complied with the statutory requirements. Regarding the grounds of objection, the Court found that it was not necessary for the notice to specify which of the two limbs of section 149D(1)(g) was relied upon, as the trustee indicated at the hearing that it was relying on both limbs. The Court also found that the evidence relied on in the notice was adequately set out, allowing the bankrupt to make sensible and informed decisions about how to proceed with a review of the trustee's decision, if necessary.

Finally, the Court found that the notice of objection sufficiently set out the reasons for the objection, as it went beyond a mere restatement of the grounds of objection and disclosed the trustee's purpose for lodging the objection. The Court concluded that the notice satisfied the criteria laid down in Re Hall, enabling the bankrupt to make sensible and informed decisions with respect to the evidence and future course of action. As a result, the Court dismissed the bankrupt's application and ordered that the trustee's costs be paid by the bankrupt.

Orders