WILKINSON & KEMP

In the matter of *Wilkinson & Kemp*, heard by Judge Scarlett, the applicant, an unsecured creditor, sought to enforce a property order against the respondent, who had been declared bankrupt on 27 August 2015. The respondent's bankruptcy meant that any debt owed to the applicant would be a provable debt within the bankruptcy proceedings.

The central legal issues before the court were the competency of the applicant's Application in a Case filed on 2 October 2015, and the validity of subpoenas issued on 29 October 2015 to various parties. The applicant's attempt to enforce a property order in the context of the respondent's bankruptcy raised questions about the appropriate procedural avenue for such enforcement.

Judge Scarlett determined that the Application in a Case was incompetent. This conclusion was based on the principle that once a party is made bankrupt, the enforcement of debts or property orders against them must generally proceed through the framework of the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth) and the rules governing bankruptcy proceedings, rather than through family law enforcement mechanisms. Consequently, the subpoenas issued in support of the incompetent application were also set aside.

The court ordered that the Application in a Case filed on 2 October 2015 be dismissed as incompetent, and the subpoenas filed on 29 October 2015 be set aside. No order was made for costs.