FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| RICHARDSON v LEONARD COHEN & CO | [2007] FMCA 78 |
| BANKRUPTCY – Application for extension of time for compliance with bankruptcy notice – whether appeal not filed within time for compliance with bankruptcy notice a proceeding to set aside judgment – not a proceeding – application dismissed. BANKRUPTCY – Application for extension of time for compliance with bankruptcy notice – discretion – principles to be applied – application dismissed. |
| Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), s.41(6A),(6C) Federal Magistrates Act 1999 (Cth), s.104(2) Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.20.03 Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O26, r.15 |
| Applicant: | PHILLIP NOEL RICHARDSON |
| Respondent: | LEONARD COHEN & CO |
| File Number: | PEG 247 of 2006 |
| Judgment of: | Lucev FM |
| Hearing date: | 19 October 2006 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 19 October 2006 |
| Delivered at: | Perth |
| Delivered on: | 1 February 2007 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr C S Williams |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Solomon Brothers |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Mr B W Ashdown |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Stewart Forbes |
ORDERS
That the application for review of Registrar Stanley’s orders of 25 September 2006 be dismissed.
The Applicant to pay the Respondent’s costs to be agreed, or if not agreed, taxed according to the Federal Court Scale: see FCR Order 62.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PERTH |
PEG 247 of 2006
| PHILLIP NOEL RICHARDSON |
Applicant
And
| LEONARD COHEN & CO |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The Extension of Time application
On 21 September 2006 Phillip Richardson (“Applicant”) applied for an extension of time (“Extension of Time Application”) in…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Richardson v Leonard Cohen & Co 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2007] FMCA 78
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court determined that the appeal was not a proceeding to set aside a judgment and therefore not subject to the time constraints applicable to such proceedings. However, the court held that the application for an extension of time was a proceeding, and as such, it should have been filed within the time prescribed by the Bankruptcy Notice. The court noted that the principles for granting an extension of time were well established, and required a demonstration of exceptional circumstances. Richardson did not demonstrate any exceptional circumstances, and the court held that the application for an extension of time should be dismissed. The court also held that the application for review of Registrar Stanley’s orders should be dismissed.
The court dismissed the application for an extension of time to file the appeal and the application for review of Registrar Stanley’s orders. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs, to be agreed or, if not agreed, taxed according to the Federal Court Scale.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
That the application for review of Registrar Stanley’s orders of 25 September 2006 be dismissed.
2.
The Applicant to pay the Respondent’s costs to be agreed, or if not agreed, taxed according to the Federal Court Scale: see FCR Order 62.
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.