In this matter it is conceded on behalf of the petitioning creditor that a notice was given by the debtor, under S. 41 subsec. 5 of the Bankru~tcv Act, that he disputed the validity of the bankruptcy notice on the ground of a mis- statement therein of the amount-due to the creditor. The mis- statement involved a claim alleged to be excessive to the extent of approximately $70. It is also conceded that there was in fact such a mis-statement to be found in the bankruptcy notice, unless it could be said that a certificate of judgment obtained from the Distrlct Court and flled in the Registry was conclusive.
was in error, I consider that upon the authorltles there is simply no answer possible for the petitioning creditor to the defect in the bankruptcy notice. I have been referred to Walsh v. The Deputv Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia (1984) 156 CLR 337. That decision is, of course, binding on me, and has been applied in a great many cases including Re Clubb: Ex oarte Clubb v. Westpac
Bankina Corporation (1990) 93 ALR 123 at 125.
Accordingly, I dismiss the petition.
I certify that this and the preceding page are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his
| Honour Kr Justice Burchett. | R |
| Dated: 14 May 1991 | I/ Associate |