McDonald v Young (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 161

McDonald v Young (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 161

The Court determined that the primary judge was entitled to make no order as to costs for the application to set aside subpoenas and notice to produce, and that her Honour did not overlook those costs, thus there was no error of principle. The orders relating to costs and the treatment of the assets as Exempt Assets were varied accordingly. A costs certificate was granted to the respondent under s 6 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth).

Parties
Appellant: Geoffrey David McDonald; Respondent: Kathryn Anne Young
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Oral Hearing and Submissions
Outcome
Appeal upheld in part
Legal Topics
Trustee Remuneration, Exempt Assets, Costs Orders, Costs Certificates
Bankruptcy Costs Trustee Remuneration Exempt Assets Costs Orders Costs Certificates

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Geoffrey David McDonald

Appellant

Kathryn Anne Young

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment After Oral Hearing and Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the primary judge erred in not ordering costs in favour of the Trustee for the application to set aside subpoenas and notice to produce
  2. 2 Whether the Court should vary specific orders of the primary judge regarding costs and treatment of assets
  3. 3 Whether the respondent is entitled to a costs certificate under the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that the primary judge was entitled to make no order as to costs for the application to set aside subpoenas and notice to produce, and that her Honour did not overlook those costs, thus there was no error of principle. The orders relating to costs and the treatment of the assets as Exempt Assets were varied accordingly. A costs certificate was granted to the respondent under s 6 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth).

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld in part

Orders

  • Orders 4, 5 and 8 made by the primary judge varied as specified
  • Chris Macryannis Family Trust assets treated as Exempt Assets