Re Greer, A.J. v Ex parte Supalux Paint Pty Ltd [1995] FCA 339

Re Greer, A.J. v Ex parte Supalux Paint Pty Ltd [1995] FCA 339

It was established on the evidence that there was a prima facie risk of unauthorised withdrawals from the debtor's accounts that could diminish assets available to creditors. Given evidence of a well-founded petition and apparent asset depletion, it was necessary in the interests of creditors to appoint a person to take control of the property, subject to liberty for the debtor to apply to vary/discharge and further evidence being considered at a subsequent hearing.

Parties
Judgment Debtor: Alan James Greer; Petitioning Creditor: Supalux Paint Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 1995
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application / Interlocutory Application for Control Over Property (ex Parte, Before Sequestration Order)
Outcome
Application granted in part (interim order for control of property)
Legal Topics
Interim Control of Debtor's Property, Section 50 Bankruptcy Act, Interests of Creditors, Interim Receiver Appointment
Bankruptcy Interim Control of Debtor's Property Section 50 Bankruptcy Act Interests of Creditors Interim Receiver Appointment

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan James Greer

Judgment Debtor

Supalux Paint Pty Ltd

Petitioning Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Application / Interlocutory Application for Control Over Property (ex Parte, Before Sequestration Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether control of property of debtor is necessary in the interests of creditors under s50 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966
  2. 2 Whether interim control appropriate where Supreme Court order exists restraining debtor's disposal of assets
  3. 3 Whether evidence supports risk of asset depletion

Ratio Decidendi

It was established on the evidence that there was a prima facie risk of unauthorised withdrawals from the debtor's accounts that could diminish assets available to creditors. Given evidence of a well-founded petition and apparent asset depletion, it was necessary in the interests of creditors to appoint a person to take control of the property, subject to liberty for the debtor to apply to vary/discharge and further evidence being considered at a subsequent hearing.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part (interim order for control of property)

Orders

  • Christopher Michael Williamson appointed to take control of the debtor's property until further order
  • Applicant creditor to deposit $1500 with Christopher Michael Williamson to meet fees and expenses