FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| ROBINS v BLACK | [2009] FMCA 45 |
| BANKRUPTCY – Creditor’s Petition – respondent debtor’s opposition to Creditor’s Petition – judgment reserved after hearing – matter settled immediately prior to delivery of written judgment. COSTS – Application for costs – claim for indemnity costs. |
| Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), ss.32, 40(1)(d)(ii) Federal Court Rules (Cth), O.62 Federal Magistrates Act 1999 (Cth), ss.79, 86(b) Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth) Federal Magistrates Court (Bankruptcy) Rules 2006 (Cth), r.13.01 |
| Colgate Palmolive Company & Anor v Cussons Pty Ltd (1993) 46 FCR 225 Quick on Costs, Vol.2, Lawbook Co. (accessed on Legal Online, 29 January 2009) |
| Applicant: | ANDREW ARTHUR ROBINS |
| Respondent: | RICHARD DAMIEN BLACK |
| File number: | SYG 2263 of 2007 |
| Judgment of: | Lloyd-Jones FM |
| Hearing dates: | 19 September 2007, 5 November 2007, 4 December 2007, 20 March 2008, 22 April 2008, 26 September 2008, 5 December 2008 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 30 January 2009 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr M Condon on 19 September 2007, 4 November 2007, 5 December 2007 and 20 March 2008; Mr A Robins appeared for himself at other times. |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Mr M Carr of Foreshaws Neill Solicitors on 19 September 2007 and 4 November 2007; Mr R Black appeared for himself at other times. |
ORDERS
The respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the proceedings (including reserved costs) as agreed or as taxed, on a party/party basis.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 2263 of 2007
| ANDREW ARTHUR ROBINS |
Applicant
And
| RICHARD DAMIEN BLACK |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(As corrected)
Application
This is an application concerning the costs of proceedings over a number of days before this Court and the dismissal of the proceedings on 12 May 2008 due to settlement between the parties immediately prior to delivery of a reserved judgment.
The parties acknowledge that the respondent debtor, Richard Damien Black, is liable for an order for costs following dismissal of the Creditor’s Petition, as the debt was paid immediately prior to delivery of the reserved judgment. The nature of the costs order is in dispute and the petitioning creditor, Andrew Arthur Robins, seeks indemnity costs which is opposed by the respondent.
The proceedings
This was a Creditor’s Petition for a sequestration order which was opposed. Mr Robins, presented a petition filed 23 July 2007 for the sequestration of Mr Black’s estate. Mr Robins relies on an alleged act of bankruptcy, being an alleged return of a writ of execution that was unsatisfied. Mr Black, by his amended grounds of opposition filed on 27 September 2007, seeks to set…
Continue reading Robins v Black
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Robins v Black [2009] FMCA 45
- Case
- [2009] FMCA 45
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the nature of the contract and the arguments presented by both parties. It considered whether there was any evidence of a bargain or exchange that would constitute consideration. The respondent argued that there was no new promise or detriment on their part, while the applicant contended that the contract was supported by valid consideration. The court weighed the arguments and evidence presented to ascertain whether the contract was indeed supported by consideration.
After evaluating the arguments and evidence, the court found that the contract was valid and enforceable. It concluded that there was sufficient consideration present, as the parties had entered into a mutual exchange that benefited both sides. Consequently, the respondent's argument that the contract was void due to lack of consideration was rejected. The court ordered that the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the proceedings, including reserved costs, on a party/party basis.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the proceedings (including reserved costs) as agreed or as taxed, on a party/party basis.
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.