Gibbs, Alan Harry v Triscott, Paul Anthony [1996] FCA 895

The material advanced by the appellant did not establish any cause of action sounding in damages which could constitute a counterclaim or cross-demand under s. 40(1)(g) of the Bankruptcy Act. The bankruptcy notice was not defective in form and was founded on a final order enforceable by execution.

Parties: Appellant: Alan Harry Gibbs; Respondent: Paul Anthony Triscott
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 16 October 1996
Procedural Posture: Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal From a Decision of a Single Judge
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Bankruptcy Notice, Cross Demand, Wrongful Prosecution, Costs Order, Form of Bankruptcy Notice, Final Order, Enforceability by Execution

Bankruptcy Bankruptcy Notice Cross Demand Wrongful Prosecution Costs Order Form of Bankruptcy Notice Final Order Enforceability by Execution

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Alan Harry Gibbs

Appellant

Paul Anthony Triscott

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal From a Decision of a Single Judge

Legal Issues

1 Whether the appellant had a cross-demand for wrongful prosecution
2 Whether the bankruptcy notice should be set aside
3 Whether the bankruptcy notice was in correct form

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

The appeal is dismissed.
The appellant is to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement.