IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
GENERAL DIVISION )
BANKRUPTCY DISTRICT OF THE )
STATE OF QUEENSLAND )
No. QP 254 of 1996
RE:KENNETH PETER MACPHEE
EX PARTE:KENNETH PETER MACPHEE
No. QP 132 of 1996
RE:KENNETH PETER MACPHEE
EX PARTE:SAILINGTON PTY LTD
MINUTES OF ORDER
JUDGE MAKING ORDER: Spender J
DATE OF ORDER: 13 May 1996
WHERE MADE: Brisbane
THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:
(1)the first creditor's petition No. QP 132 of 1996 be dismissed as against both Kenneth Peter MacPhee and Rodney Frederick Hardacre;
(2)the Registrar accept the petition No. QP 254 of 1996, being the debtor's petition of Mr MacPhee presented on 17 April 1996;
(3)that the costs of the petitioning creditor, Sailington Pty Ltd, in petition No. QP 132 of 1996 as against MacPhee, including reserved costs, be taxed and paid out of the estate of Kenneth Peter MacPhee as if they were the costs of a successful petitioning creditor.
(4)there be no order as to the costs of Sailington Pty Ltd in respect of the creditor's petition against Rodney Frederick Hardacre, including any reserved costs.
NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 124 of the Bankruptcy Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
GENERAL DIVISION )
BANKRUPTCY DISTRICT OF THE )
STATE OF QUEENSLAND )
No. QP 254 of 1996
RE:KENNETH PETER MACPHEE
EX PARTE:KENNETH PETER MACPHEE
No. QP 132 of 1996
RE:KENNETH PETER MACPHEE
EX PARTE:SAILINGTON PTY LTD
CORAM: Spender J
DATE: 13 May 1996
PLACE: Brisbane
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
There are before the Court two petitions. A creditor's petition No QP 132 of 1996 against Kenneth Peter MacPhee and Rodney Frederick Hardacre, which petition was presented on 26 February 1996. There is also a debtor's petition No. QP 254 of 1996, Mr MacPhee having presented his petition on 17 April 1996. The Bankruptcy Act 1966 requires each of the petitions now to be referred to the Court for directions.
It appears that the creditor's petition against the two debtors has not been served on Mr MacPhee and the solicitor on behalf of the petitioning creditor consents to the dismissal of the petition against Kenneth Peter MacPhee on the understanding that the debtor's petition will be the
subject of a direction to the Registrar to accept it and conditioned also on the petitioning creditor's costs in respect of the creditor's petition against the debtor, Mr MacPhee in the creditor's petition, be protected by an appropriate order.
There is a further complication in that, this morning, there was attempted to be filed, a consent by Phillip Gregory Jefferson to act as trustee of the estate of Kenneth Peter MacPhee in the event that he becomes bankrupt. That consent was dated 13 May 1996. In the creditor's petition there was a consent dated 23 January 1996 by Mr Jefferson as well as by Jay Arscott Stevenson consenting to the trustees of the joint and several estates of Kenneth Peter MacPhee and Rodney Frederick Hardacre or, if only one of them becomes a bankrupt, as trustee of the estate of that debtor. That consent was filed on 26 February 1996.
Having regard to the provisions of s 156A and in particular sub-section (3) of that section, it seems to me that I ought to decline to permit Mr Jefferson's more recent consent to be filed. The effect of the Act is that when a direction is given to the Registrar to accept the debtor's petition of Mr MacPhee, Mr Stevenson and Mr Jefferson will become trustees of his estate by virtue of the consent which was filed on 26 February 1996 in the creditor's petition.
I therefore direct that first the creditor's petition, No QP 132 of 1996, be dismissed as against both Kenneth Peter MacPhee and Roderick Frederick Hardacre.
I direct that the Registrar accept the petition No QP 254 of 1996, being the debtor's petition of Mr MacPhee, which was presented on 17 April 1996.
I direct that the costs of the petitioning creditor, Sailington Pty Ltd, in petition No QP 132 of 1996 as against Kenneth Peter MacPhee, including reserved costs, be taxed and paid out of the estate of Kenneth Peter MacPhee as if they were the costs of a successful petitioning creditor.
I direct that there be no order as to the costs of Sailington Pty Ltd in respect of the creditor's petition against Roderick Frederick Hardacre, including any reserved costs.
I certify that this and the preceding two (2) pages are a true copy of the reasons for judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Spender.
Associate
Date: 13 May 1996
No appearance for Kenneth Peter MacPhee
Solicitors for Sailington Pty Ltd : M J Murray & Associates
Date of Hearing : 13 May 1996
- AGLC
- Re MacPhee, Kenneth Ex Parte MacPhee, Kenneth Re MacPhee, Kenneth Ex Parte Sailington Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 428
- Case
- [1996] FCA 428
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court began by noting that the creditor's petition against MacPhee had not been served on him, and the petitioning creditor consented to the dismissal of the petition against MacPhee on the condition that the debtor's petition would be accepted and that the petitioning creditor's costs would be protected. The court further considered the implications of the Bankruptcy Act 1966, particularly section 156A, in deciding whether to permit a more recent consent from a potential trustee. Justice Spender concluded that the more recent consent should not be accepted due to the provisions of the Act, which dictated that the earlier consent filed on 26 February 1996 would govern. Therefore, the court directed the dismissal of the creditor's petition against both MacPhee and Hardacre and ordered the Registrar to accept the debtor's petition. Furthermore, the court mandated that the costs incurred by Sailington Pty Ltd in the creditor's petition against MacPhee be treated as costs of a successful petitioning creditor and paid out of MacPhee's estate, with no such order for costs against Hardacre.
The final orders of the court were that the creditor's petition No. QP 132 of 1996 be dismissed as against both Kenneth Peter MacPhee and Rodney Frederick Hardacre, the Registrar accept the debtor's petition No. QP 254 of 1996, the costs of Sailington Pty Ltd in the creditor's petition against MacPhee be taxed and paid out of the estate, and there be no order for the costs of the creditor's petition against Hardacre. These decisions were made to ensure compliance with the Bankruptcy Act and to appropriately allocate the responsibilities and costs associated with the bankruptcy proceedings.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.