In the matter of Rose, a bankrupt; Godfrey v Whitton (No 2) [2007] FCA 494

In the matter of Rose, a bankrupt; Godfrey v Whitton (No 2) [2007] FCA 494

There is no proper basis for a stay of execution on the costs orders. The order for costs against the Trustee was not opposed, and the applicants' costs are not connected to other proceedings. The Amended Notice of Motion for a stay is dismissed.

Parties
First Applicant: Murray Godfrey as administrator of Regis Towers Real Estate Pty Limited (in administration) ACN 087 088 202; Second Applicant: Regis Towers Real Estate Pty Limited (in administration) ACN 087 088 202; First Respondent: Robert William Whitton as trustee of the estate of John Emmanuel Rose, a bankrupt; Second Respondent: Official Receiver
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Post Judgment Application Regarding Costs Orders (amended Notice of Motion for Stay of Execution)
Outcome
Amended Notice of Motion dismissed; applicant to pay respondents’ costs.
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Costs, Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth), Federal Court Procedure
Bankruptcy Stay of Execution Costs Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) Federal Court Procedure

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Murray Godfrey as administrator of Regis Towers Real Estate Pty Limited (in administration) ACN 087 088 202

First Applicant

Regis Towers Real Estate Pty Limited (in administration) ACN 087 088 202

Second Applicant

Robert William Whitton as trustee of the estate of John Emmanuel Rose, a bankrupt

First Respondent

Official Receiver

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Post Judgment Application Regarding Costs Orders (amended Notice of Motion for Stay of Execution)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a stay of execution should be granted with respect to orders as to costs made on 22 June 2006

Ratio Decidendi

There is no proper basis for a stay of execution on the costs orders. The order for costs against the Trustee was not opposed, and the applicants' costs are not connected to other proceedings. The Amended Notice of Motion for a stay is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Amended Notice of Motion dismissed; applicant to pay respondents’ costs.

Orders

  • The Amended Notice of Motion filed in Court on 12 March 2007 be dismissed.
  • The applicant in the motion (the first respondent in the proceedings) pay the costs of the respondents to the motion (Murray Godfrey as administrator of Regis Towers Real Estate Pty Limited (in administration) and Regis Towers Real Estate Pty Limited (in administration)).