Williamson v Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Limited

This matter came before Driver J of the Federal Court of Australia concerning an application by Mr Williamson to set aside a bankruptcy notice issued by Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Limited. Mr Williamson sought to rely on an alleged counterclaim, set-off, or cross-demand arising from his 2007 purchase of a property known as "Reevesdale".

The central legal issue was whether Mr Williamson had established a sufficient counterclaim, set-off, or cross-demand for the purposes of section 40(1)(g) of the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth) to justify setting aside the bankruptcy notice. This required the court to determine if Mr Williamson had demonstrated a prima facie case, a fair chance of success, or was fairly entitled to litigate his claim, and that the claim was genuine or bona fide.

Driver J found that Mr Williamson's alleged counterclaim, which stemmed from claims of misleading conduct by a selling agent and non-disclosure of a proposed quarry development during the purchase of Reevesdale, and the Bank's alleged receipt of proceeds of fraud due to its shareholding in the vendor's mortgagee, faced grave difficulties. His Honour noted that the underlying issues had been litigated three times previously, unsuccessfully for Mr Williamson, and that the current application was being resisted by the Bank. The court agreed with the Bank's submissions that Mr Williamson had not satisfied the necessary criteria to establish a valid counterclaim for the purposes of the *Bankruptcy Act*.