Nadjarian, G. v. Myer Melbourne Ltd [1981] FCA 271

Nadjarian, G. v. Myer Melbourne Ltd [1981] FCA 271

None of the grounds advanced by the bankrupt justify a stay or suspension of the sequestration order; the appeals may not proceed if security for costs is not given, and the court has no power to grant a stay beyond statutory limitation.

Parties
Debtor: George Nadjarian; Creditor: Myer Melbourne Ltd.
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 1981
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Motion for Stay or Suspension of Sequestration Order
Outcome
Motion for stay and application for suspension refused.
Legal Topics
Sequestration Order, Stay of Proceedings, Security for Costs
Insolvency Bankruptcy Sequestration Order Stay of Proceedings Security for Costs

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Nadjarian

Debtor

Myer Melbourne Ltd.

Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Motion for Stay or Suspension of Sequestration Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has power to stay or suspend the operation of the sequestration order pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether grounds exist for staying or suspending the sequestration order

Ratio Decidendi

None of the grounds advanced by the bankrupt justify a stay or suspension of the sequestration order; the appeals may not proceed if security for costs is not given, and the court has no power to grant a stay beyond statutory limitation.

Court Disposition

Motion for stay and application for suspension refused.

Orders

  • The motions for stay and application for suspension of the operation of the sequestration order are refused.