In the Matter of Ewins, David & Georgie & Hooper, John v Ewins, David & Anor [1997] FCA 1267

In the Matter of Ewins, David & Georgie & Hooper, John v Ewins, David & Anor [1997] FCA 1267

Section 188(4) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) only prevents a debtor from giving a further effective authority within six months. Where a previous authority was not and could not become effective, a subsequent authority is not barred and, if the conditions of effectiveness are met, is valid.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 November 1997
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application / Determination of Separate Question Prior to Creditor's Petition Hearing
Outcome
The question is answered 'Yes'; the authority dated 17 November 1997 is valid.
Legal Topics
['effectiveness of Authority Under S 188 Bankruptcy Act' 'successive Authorities Within Six Months' 'part X Bankruptcy Act']
['bankruptcy'] ['effectiveness of Authority Under S 188 Bankruptcy Act' 'successive Authorities Within Six Months' 'part X Bankruptcy Act']

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

Bankruptcy Application / Determination of Separate Question Prior to Creditor's Petition Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a second authority under s 188 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) signed within six months is valid when the first authority was not effective']

Ratio Decidendi

Section 188(4) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) only prevents a debtor from giving a further effective authority within six months. Where a previous authority was not and could not become effective, a subsequent authority is not barred and, if the conditions of effectiveness are met, is valid.

Court Disposition

The question is answered 'Yes'; the authority dated 17 November 1997 is valid.

Orders

  • ["The question: 'Whether the authority dated 17 November 1997 signed by the debtors naming and authorising Warren Pantzer to call a meeting of the debtors' creditors and to take control of the debtors' property is a valid authority', be answered 'Yes'."]