Roufeil v Fiore, in the matter of the Bankrupt Estate of Peter Andrew Fiore (No 2)

The matter before the Court concerns an application to set aside examination summonses issued in the context of the bankruptcy of Peter Andrew Fiore. The applicants, Liliana and Carmello Fiore, seek to challenge the summonses on various grounds, including that they are not authorised by the relevant statutory provisions and that they seek information not related to the examinable affairs of the bankrupt. The Court is required to determine whether the summonses are valid and, if so, whether they should be set aside in part due to the scope of the information requested. The central issue for the Court is whether the examination summonses issued to Liliana Fiore are authorised by the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) and whether the scope of the information requested is appropriate. The Court must also consider whether the summonses are oppressive or whether they serve a legitimate purpose in the administration of the bankruptcy estate.

The Court considered the statutory framework governing examination summonses and the principles established in relevant case law. It noted that the purpose of an examination under the Bankruptcy Act is to enable the trustee to investigate the affairs of the bankrupt and to gather information necessary for the administration of the estate. The Court held that the summonses to Liliana Fiore were authorised by s 81(1B)(b) of the Bankruptcy Act as they sought production of documents relating to the examinable affairs of Peter Fiore. However, the Court found that the scope of the information requested was overly broad and not directly relevant to the examinable affairs of Peter Fiore. The summonses sought extensive personal and family financial information that did not pertain to the bankrupt's affairs, which was deemed to be an oppressive exercise of the statutory power. Consequently, the Court set aside the summonses in part, limiting the scope of the information that Liliana Fiore is required to produce.

The Court ordered that the matter be adjourned to allow the parties to confer and prepare a minute of proposed orders. The Court directed that the parties bring in a minute or minutes of proposed orders by 4.00 pm on Thursday 20 June 2019, reflecting these reasons, including any agreed costs. The Court emphasised the importance of resolving the issues around the summonses to avoid further inconvenience and cost to all parties involved.