Sammut v Paul Leroy as trustee of the Bankrupt Estates of Joanne De Rome and Geoffrey De Rome

In the matter of *Sammut v Paul Leroy as trustee of the Bankrupt Estates of Joanne De Rome and Geoffrey De Rome*, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning the validity of a deed of assignment of a debt. The applicant, Mr. Sammut, sought to enforce a debt against the respondents, Mr. Leroy in his capacity as trustee of the bankrupt estates of Joanne and Geoffrey De Rome. The core of the dispute revolved around whether Mr. Sammut had acquired a valid legal right to pursue the debt.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the deed of assignment, by which the debt was purportedly transferred to Mr. Sammut, was effective to vest the legal chose in action in him. This required the Court to consider the requirements for a valid assignment of a legal chose in action under Australian law, particularly in the context of a debt owed by bankrupt individuals.

Judge Manousaridis reasoned that for a legal chose in action to be validly assigned, the assignment must be in writing and signed by the assignor. Furthermore, express notice in writing of the assignment must be given to the debtor. In this instance, the Court found that while a deed of assignment existed, there was insufficient evidence to establish that express notice in writing of the assignment had been given to the debtors, the De Rome estates. Without this crucial element, the assignment was not effective at law, meaning Mr. Sammut did not acquire the legal right to sue for the debt.

Consequently, the Court dismissed Mr. Sammut's application, finding that he had not established a valid legal entitlement to the debt.