Re Weiss, Z. v Ex parte Brien, R.C - [1989] FCA 182

L I M I T E D D I S T R I B U T I O N

BANKRUPTCY - P r e f e r e n t l a l p a y m e n t t o l n d e m n l f y l n g credltors

- B a n k r u p t c y A c t 1966.

RE: ZDENEK WEISS EX PARTE RICHARD CAMPBELL BRIEN

N o . 293 of 1 9 7 8

2 8 FEBRUARY 1989
LOCKHART J.
SYDNEY
LIMITED DISTRIBUTION

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
1
BANKRUPTCY DISTRICT OF THE STATE

) No. 293 of 1978
)

OF NEW SOUTH WALES AND THE

) )
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )

BETWEEN: ZDENEK WEISS

A Bankrupt

EX PARTE: RICHARD CAMPBELL BRIEN
28 February 1989
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

LOCKHART J.

This is an application by the trustee of the estate of

zdenek Weiss for orders that the trustee pay out of available

funds certain payments to the Deputy Commissioner of

Taxation, a creditor of the estate, in priority to other

unsecured creditors. The orders sought are that the funds be
applied in the following order:

First, the trustee's taxed costs of this appllcatlon;

Second, $4,544.10 to the Deputy Commissioner in

reimbursement of certain of the costs and expenses of

earlier litigation in this Court to whlch reference
shall be made later;

Third, 100 cents in the dollar to the Deputy

Commissioner in respect of hls debt, or such other
dividends as the court thinks fit; and

Fourth, the balance of the funds in the order of payment

prescribed under the Bankruptcy Act 1966 and the
Bankruptcy Rules.
The application is opposed by the Law Society of New

South Wales, a creditor of the estate in various capacities

in sums which total some $75 ',311.42. The Deputy Commissloner

is a creditor in the sum of $49,114, but of that sum he has

deferred to other creditors In respect of late payment
penalties and additional tax, leaving the amount of his debt
for which he claims priority as $34,838.

The Law Society has no oblectlon to the payment of the

Trustee's costs of this application or of the payment of the

sum of $4,544.10. The dispute is as to whether 100 cents in

the dollar of the Deputy Commissioner's debt or any other sum

should be paid to the Deputy Commlssioner In priority to
other creditors.

A brlef statement of the facts of the matter is

necessary. On 28 April 1978 Mr. Weiss became bankrupt upon

presentation of his own petltron. The Offlclal Trustee

became trustee of the estate. By transfer of 1981,

registered in 1982, the bankrupt's mother became registered
as the proprietor of an estate in fee slmple in certaln land

at Victoria Road, Bellevue H111 ("the house").

In the course of the investigation of the estate, the

view was formed by the trustee that the house was divisible
amongst the creditors of the estate,…

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 Weiss, Z. v Ex parte Brien, R.C 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: [1989] FCA 182
Decision Date: 28 Feb 1989

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Weiss; Ex parte Brien involved the dispute between Zdenek Weiss, the bankrupt, and Richard Campbell Brien, the liquidator. The central issue was the preferential payment made to a creditor, which the liquidator sought to recover under the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act 1966. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue the court had to determine was whether the preferential payment made to a creditor, which was more than the amount that would have been distributed to all other creditors, could be reclaimed by the liquidator under section 121 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966. Specifically, the court had to examine the circumstances surrounding the payment and whether it was made within the six-month period prior to the bankruptcy, as this would make it subject to recovery. The court also needed to consider the impact of the preferential payment on the distribution of the bankrupt's estate among all creditors.

The Federal Court found that the preferential payment in question was indeed made within the six-month period before the bankruptcy, and it was significantly larger than payments made to other creditors. The court held that such payments could be reclaimed by the liquidator to ensure that all creditors received an equal distribution from the estate. The reasoning was based on the statutory provisions of the Bankruptcy Act 1966, which aim to prevent preferential treatment of certain creditors before a bankruptcy is declared. The court emphasised that the recovery of such payments was essential to maintain fairness and equality among creditors.

In conclusion, the Federal Court ordered that the preferential payment made to the creditor be recovered and distributed equally among all creditors. This decision underscored the importance of adhering to the statutory framework established to govern the equitable distribution of a bankrupt's estate.

Orders