Inspector-General in Bankruptcy v Sam Pos Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1621

Inspector-General in Bankruptcy v Sam Pos Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1621

Sam Pos Pty Ltd and Simone Hildebrand are in default, having not complied with court orders or participated in proceedings. The pleaded facts establish breach of duty and breach of trust under the Bankruptcy Act and equitable principles. Orders for compensation and declarations are warranted by default judgment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Default Judgment / Default Judgment After Non Compliance and Non Appearance
Outcome
Default judgment granted against first and second respondents for payment, declaration and costs; interlocutory application against third respondent adjourned.
Legal Topics
['default Judgment' 'debt Agreement Administration' 'breach of Trust' 'equitable Compensation']

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 Default Judgment / Default Judgment After Non Compliance and Non Appearance

  1. 1 ['Whether Sam Pos Pty Ltd breached statutory and equitable duties as debt agreement administrator by improper payment from trust account' 'Whether Simone Hildebrand was knowingly concerned in breach of trust by Sam Pos Pty Ltd' 'Whether orders for payment and equitable compensation should issue by default judgment']

Ratio Decidendi

Sam Pos Pty Ltd and Simone Hildebrand are in default, having not complied with court orders or participated in proceedings. The pleaded facts establish breach of duty and breach of trust under the Bankruptcy Act and equitable principles. Orders for compensation and declarations are warranted by default judgment.

Court Disposition

Default judgment granted against first and second respondents for payment, declaration and costs; interlocutory application against third respondent adjourned.

Orders

  • ['The first respondent pay to the second applicant the sum of $1,130,877.63 together with interest in the sum of $40,311.91.' "The first respondent pay the applicants' costs of the proceeding against it." "It is declared that the second respondent was knowingly concerned in a breach of trust by the first respondent...