Geronimo v State of Western Australia [2024] FCA 196

Geronimo v State of Western Australia [2024] FCA 196

The second respondent's interest had been disclaimed by the trustee and had vested in the State, so he no longer had an interest capable of conveyance. The applicant nevertheless entered the purchase, incurred mortgage obligations and expenses, moved into the property, and was not at fault. With no opposition from the State or second respondent, it was just and equitable under s 133(9) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) to vest the disclaimed interest in the applicant and permit registration of the associated conveyancing documents.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 133(9) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) for Vesting of Disclaimed Property / Final Orders After Hearing
Outcome
Application granted; vesting order made with no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['disclaimer by Trustee in Bankruptcy' 'vesting Order' 'tenant in Common Interest in Real Property' "registrar's Caveat" 'doctrine of Escheat' 'just and Equitable Relief']
['bankruptcy' 'property Law' 'conveyancing'] ['disclaimer by Trustee in Bankruptcy' 'vesting Order' 'tenant in Common Interest in Real Property' "registrar's Caveat" 'doctrine of Escheat' 'just and Equitable Relief']

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Under S 133(9) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) for Vesting of Disclaimed Property / Final Orders After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the bankrupt's former interest in the property should vest in the applicant under s 133(9) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth)." 'Whether it was just and equitable to make a vesting order where the applicant purported to purchase the property, incurred mortgage liabilities and expenses, and moved into the property despite the former bankrupt having no conveyable interest after disclaimer.']

Ratio Decidendi

The second respondent's interest had been disclaimed by the trustee and had vested in the State, so he no longer had an interest capable of conveyance. The applicant nevertheless entered the purchase, incurred mortgage obligations and expenses, moved into the property, and was not at fault. With no opposition from the State or second respondent, it was just and equitable under s 133(9) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) to vest the disclaimed interest in the applicant and permit registration of the associated conveyancing documents.

Court Disposition

Application granted; vesting order made with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ["Pursuant to s 133(9) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) the second respondent's disclaimed interest in the property located at 27 Donald Drive, McKail, Western Australia being the whole of the land comprised and described in Certificate of Title Volume 2717 Folio 74, Lot 284 on Deposited Plan 61739, vest in the...