Morris, Re C.R. & Anor Maroudas, J. & Anor [1986] FCA 195

Morris, Re C.R. & Anor Maroudas, J. & Anor [1986] FCA 195

Contingent and uncertain claims arising from breach of contract, which are not provable under a deed of assignment pursuant to Part X of the Bankruptcy Act due to the narrower definition of 'liability' in Rule 82, do not bind the creditor; hence, the creditor is not precluded by the deed from enforcing their judgment for damages.

Parties
Applicant: Charles Richard Morris; Applicant: Pamela Morris; Respondent: John Maroudas; Respondent: Shirley Janet Maroudas
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 1986
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application / Application to Set Aside Judgment and Stay Execution
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Deeds of Assignment, Contingent Claims, Provable Debts, Release of Debt Under Deed, Stay of Execution
Bankruptcy Deeds of Assignment Contingent Claims Provable Debts Release of Debt Under Deed Stay of 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Richard Morris

Applicant

Pamela Morris

Applicant

John Maroudas

Respondent

Shirley Janet Maroudas

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Application / Application to Set Aside Judgment and Stay Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contingent and uncertain claim arising from breach of contract, prior to a deed of assignment under Part X of the Bankruptcy Act 1966, is provable under the deed
  2. 2 Whether the deed of assignment bars the creditor’s claim after judgment in respect of a previously contingent claim

Ratio Decidendi

Contingent and uncertain claims arising from breach of contract, which are not provable under a deed of assignment pursuant to Part X of the Bankruptcy Act due to the narrower definition of 'liability' in Rule 82, do not bind the creditor; hence, the creditor is not precluded by the deed from enforcing their judgment for damages.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicants pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to the application.