Re Gold, Patricia Isobel; Ex parte Gold, Patricia Isobel v The Proprietors - Units Plan No. 52 & Anor [1996] FCA 111

Re Gold, Patricia Isobel; Ex parte Gold, Patricia Isobel v The Proprietors - Units Plan No. 52 & Anor [1996] FCA 111

The application for annulment failed because no basis was shown for concluding that the sequestration order ought not to have been made. Alleged breaches by the body corporate did not discharge Mrs Gold's liability to pay validly raised levies, any remedy for failure by the corporation lay under the Unit Titles Act. The fraud allegation was not particularised or proved and disclosed no newly discovered matter capable of undermining the judgment. The s48 costs were a statutory debt distinct from taxed costs, the taxation order relied on by Mrs Gold was irrelevant, and in any event the sequestration order was founded on unpaid levies plus interest rather than the s48 costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 February 1996
Procedural Posture
Application for Annulment of Bankruptcy Under Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth), S153 B / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['annulment of Bankruptcy' 'sequestration Order' 'unit Titles' 'body Corporate Levies' 'recovery of Expenditure Under Unit Titles Act 1970 (act), S48' 'fraud Allegation']
['bankruptcy' 'real Property'] ['annulment of Bankruptcy' 'sequestration Order' 'unit Titles' 'body Corporate Levies' 'recovery of Expenditure Under Unit Titles Act 1970 (act), S48' 'fraud Allegation']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Annulment of Bankruptcy Under Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth), S153 B / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sequestration order ought not to have been made so that the bankruptcy should be annulled under Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), s153B.' 'Whether alleged breaches by the body corporate in 1985 relieved Mrs Gold of liability to pay body corporate levies raised under the Unit Titles Act 1970.' 'Whether alleged fraud by the first respondent vitiated the judgment debt for unpaid levies.' "Whether the first respondent's claim for s48 costs required prior taxation and tainted the debt relied on for the sequestration order."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for annulment failed because no basis was shown for concluding that the sequestration order ought not to have been made. Alleged breaches by the body corporate did not discharge Mrs Gold's liability to pay validly raised levies, any remedy for failure by the corporation lay under the Unit Titles Act. The fraud allegation was not particularised or proved and disclosed no newly discovered matter capable of undermining the judgment. The s48 costs were a statutory debt distinct from taxed costs, the taxation order relied on by Mrs Gold was irrelevant, and in any event the sequestration order was founded on unpaid levies plus interest rather than the s48 costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.']