Reynolds, D.M. Re Plaza Print Pty Ltd (In Liqu.) Ex parte [1988] FCA 191

Reynolds, D.M. Re Plaza Print Pty Ltd (In Liqu.) Ex parte [1988] FCA 191

The debtor's opposition failed because the alleged representation by the liquidator did not relate to the later debt claim, the alleged $9,000.00 payment was not proved to have been made or repayable, and the $16,652.46 claim was a joint claim of the debtor and his wife that lacked mutuality with the debtor's separate debt to the petitioner. The Court was satisfied that the debtor committed the alleged act of bankruptcy and that the matters required by s.52(1) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) were proved, so a sequestration order was made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 April 1988
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Creditor's Petition / Hearing of Opposed Creditor's Petition
Outcome
A sequestration order was made against the estate of David Malcolm Reynolds.
Legal Topics
["creditor's Petition" 'judgment Debt' 'bankruptcy Notice' 'act of Bankruptcy' 'set Off' 'estoppel' 'sequestration Order']
['bankruptcy' 'insolvency'] ["creditor's Petition" 'judgment Debt' 'bankruptcy Notice' 'act of Bankruptcy' 'set Off' 'estoppel' 'sequestration Order']

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

Bankruptcy Creditor's Petition / Hearing of Opposed Creditor's Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Supreme Court judgment should be accepted as satisfactory proof of the debt owing to the petitioning creditor.' 'Whether the petitioning creditor was estopped from asserting that the debtor was indebted to it.' 'Whether the debtor was entitled to set off amounts of $9,000.00 and $16,652.46 against the judgment debt.' "Whether there had been a miscarriage of justice in the Supreme Court proceedings such that the creditor's petition should be dismissed."]

Ratio Decidendi

The debtor's opposition failed because the alleged representation by the liquidator did not relate to the later debt claim, the alleged $9,000.00 payment was not proved to have been made or repayable, and the $16,652.46 claim was a joint claim of the debtor and his wife that lacked mutuality with the debtor's separate debt to the petitioner. The Court was satisfied that the debtor committed the alleged act of bankruptcy and that the matters required by s.52(1) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) were proved, so a sequestration order was made.

Court Disposition

A sequestration order was made against the estate of David Malcolm Reynolds.

Orders

  • ['A sequestration order be made against the estate of David Malcolm Reynolds.' 'The costs of the petitioning creditor, Plaza Print Pty Limited (In liquidation), other than the costs incurred in drawing, engrossing, filing and serving the amended and further amended petitions herein and the several affidavits...