| -'J | --"- "1 |
| NOT INTENDED | FOR DISTRIBUTION |
| IN THE FEDERAL COURT | ) | ||
| OF AUSTRALIA | 1 | ||
| GENERAL DIVISION |
|
| BANKRUPTCY | DISTRICT | 1 |
| OF THE STATE OF | ) | ||||
| WESTERN AUSTRALIA | 1 | ||||
|
Bankrupt
M PARTE: WILLIAM FREDEXICK TINGLEY
Applicant
and
| GEOFFREY FRANK | T O m D E L L | |
|
| ?\ \ | '\ |
Respondent
| CORAM: | TOOHEY J. | l |
| 22 July 1985 | I |
This application is based on 6.154 of the Bankruptcv Act
| 1966 which empowers the | Court where it is satisfied inter | alia |
| that, in the case of a debtor's petition the petition | ought not to |
| have been presented, to make an order annulling the | bankruptcy. |
In my view, Mr. Tingley's petition ought not to have
| been presented because there was in existence | at the time an order |
| of | the Family Court | of | Western Australia restraining him | from |
| presenting a petition pursuant to | 6 . 5 5 of the Bankruptcy Act. If |
| any question arises | as to | the authority | of the Family Court | to |
| make such an order, it is | not a question to be resolved by this |
| Court sitting in bankruptcy. There | is an order | of | the Family |
2 .
| Court evidenced in the sealed order which has been tendered to | m . |
In those circumstances, %t seems to me that the application properly falls within 6.154.
| As | Mr. Black points | out, | I have a discretion in the |
| matter. But it seems to me that | I should exercise that discretion |
| in favour of the applicant for two reasons. | The first is that it |
tends to resolve, to some extent at any rate, the position of the
| applicant in relation to | the | order of the Family Court. | I say |
that on the assumption that the petition was filed in ignorance of
| the order of that Court. | Second, | Mr. Black on behalf of the |
| bankrupt, has given assurances to | Mr. Totterdell, the present |
| trustee, | and | to | the | creditors | generally | of | his | client's |
willingness to co-operate in any sequestration proceedings that
| may be taken | by any creditor. In those circumstances | I propose to |
| exercise | my | discretion and to make | an | order annulling the |
| bankruptcy. | That will be the order of the Court. |
I certify that this and the preceding
page are a true copy o f the Ex Tempore
Reasons for Judgment herein of his
Honour Mr. Justice Toohey
- AGLC
- Re Tingley, W.F. Ex parte Tingley, W.F. v Totterdell, G.F [1985] FCA 458
- Case
- [1985] FCA 458
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Family Court order, which restrained Tingley from presenting a petition, precluded the presentation of the bankruptcy petition and thus warranted the annulment of the bankruptcy. Additionally, the court had to consider the exercise of its discretion under section 154 of the Bankruptcy Act in determining whether to annul the bankruptcy.
Justice Toohey found that the Family Court order did indeed prevent the presentation of the bankruptcy petition. He noted that the authority of the Family Court to make such an order was not a matter to be resolved by the Federal Court in this context. The existence of the Family Court order, as evidenced by the sealed order presented, was sufficient to support the annulment of the bankruptcy. In exercising his discretion, Toohey J was persuaded to annul the bankruptcy for two reasons: it would resolve the applicant's position in relation to the Family Court order, and Tingley had assured the trustee and creditors of his willingness to cooperate in any future sequestration proceedings. Consequently, the court ordered the annulment of the bankruptcy.
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.