Wilson v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2000] FCA 282

Wilson v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2000] FCA 282

The application failed because the Court was not prepared to infer that the deed of assignment was executed otherwise than on its stated date, and an absolute assignment of the debt was at least effective in equity. Even without formal notice sufficient to perfect legal title under section 12 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), the Society was a creditor entitled to prove the debt under section 82 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth). The inconsistencies between the judgment certificates did not affect the proof, which was founded on the later District Court certificate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 99 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) for an Order That a Proof of Debt Be Expunged / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['proof of Debt' 'equitable Assignment of Chose in Action' 'notice of Assignment' 'provable Debts in Bankruptcy' 'costs']
['bankruptcy' 'equity' 'assignment of Debts'] ['proof of Debt' 'equitable Assignment of Chose in Action' 'notice of Assignment' 'provable Debts in Bankruptcy' 'costs']

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 Section 99 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) for an Order That a Proof of Debt Be Expunged / Final Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the deed of assignment of the judgment debt was authentic and effective' 'Whether absence of notice to Mr Wilson meant the assignment was not effective at law under section 12 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW)' 'Whether an assignee of an equitable interest in a debt is a creditor for the purpose of section 82 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth)' 'Whether inconsistency between two certificates of judgment required the proof of debt to be expunged']

Ratio Decidendi

The application failed because the Court was not prepared to infer that the deed of assignment was executed otherwise than on its stated date, and an absolute assignment of the debt was at least effective in equity. Even without formal notice sufficient to perfect legal title under section 12 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), the Society was a creditor entitled to prove the debt under section 82 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth). The inconsistencies between the judgment certificates did not affect the proof, which was founded on the later District Court certificate.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' 'The applicant pay those costs of each respondent incurred on and from 10 January 2000.' 'There be no other order as to the costs of the application.']