Bride, E.J. & Anor v Australia Bank Ltd & Anor [1988] FCA 394

Bride, E.J. & Anor v Australia Bank Ltd & Anor [1988] FCA 394

The applicants’ alleged causes of action concerning the property and business dealings vested in their trustee upon bankruptcy by operation of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 s.58; there was no assignment by the trustee to the applicants; those claims were compromised by deed; thus, the applicants lack standing to bring the proceedings, warranting dismissal under Order 20 rule 2.

Parties
Applicant: Edward James Bride; Applicant: Wendy Margaret Bride; First Respondent: Australian Bank Limited; Second Respondent: Bryan Guthrie Stewart
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 July 1988
Procedural Posture
Motion / Motion to Dismiss Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Property Vesting in Trustee, Standing of Bankrupts, Compromise and Release, Trade Practices Act S.52
Bankruptcy Property Vesting in Trustee Standing of Bankrupts Compromise and Release Trade Practices Act S.52

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward James Bride

Applicant

Wendy Margaret Bride

Applicant

Australian Bank Limited

First Respondent

Bryan Guthrie Stewart

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Motion / Motion to Dismiss Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have standing to bring proceedings after bankruptcy
  2. 2 Whether any cause of action against respondents vests in the trustee
  3. 3 Whether trustee’s letter authorised action or constituted an assignment

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants’ alleged causes of action concerning the property and business dealings vested in their trustee upon bankruptcy by operation of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 s.58; there was no assignment by the trustee to the applicants; those claims were compromised by deed; thus, the applicants lack standing to bring the proceedings, warranting dismissal under Order 20 rule 2.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

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