Piccardi,Re; K.& G. v Grivas, Ex Parte; G.G. [1988] FCA 424

Piccardi,Re; K.& G. v Grivas, Ex Parte; G.G. [1988] FCA 424

The sequestration order ought not to have been made as the debt to the petitioning creditor was not due; majority of creditors and public interest support annulment; Court is satisfied that the circumstances of insolvency and applicants’ conduct justify annulling the bankruptcy under s 154(1)(a).

Parties
Applicant: Kurt Piccardi; Applicant: Gerlinde Piccardi; Respondent/petitioning Creditor: George Gregory Grivas; Objecting Creditor: Dick & Dons Pty Ltd; Objecting Creditor: B.W. Modern Interiors Pty Ltd; Objecting Creditor: Fire Fighting Sprinkler Co Ltd; Objecting Creditor: Boral Johns Perry Industries Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 August 1988
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Final Judgment After Applications for Review, Rescission, and Annulment
Outcome
bankruptcy annulled
Legal Topics
Sequestration Order, Annulment, Rescission, Statement of Affairs, Deed of Arrangement
Bankruptcy Sequestration Order Annulment Rescission Statement of Affairs Deed of Arrangement

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 4 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 26
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kurt Piccardi

Applicant

Gerlinde Piccardi

Applicant

George Gregory Grivas

Respondent/petitioning Creditor

Dick & Dons Pty Ltd

Objecting Creditor

B.W. Modern Interiors Pty Ltd

Objecting Creditor

Fire Fighting Sprinkler Co Ltd

Objecting Creditor

Boral Johns Perry Industries Pty Ltd

Objecting Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Final Judgment After Applications for Review, Rescission, and Annulment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the signing and sealing of the sequestration order should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the sequestration order should be rescinded or suspended
  3. 3 Whether the bankruptcy should be annulled under s 154(1)(a) of the Bankruptcy Act

Ratio Decidendi

The sequestration order ought not to have been made as the debt to the petitioning creditor was not due; majority of creditors and public interest support annulment; Court is satisfied that the circumstances of insolvency and applicants’ conduct justify annulling the bankruptcy under s 154(1)(a).

Court Disposition

bankruptcy annulled

Orders

  • The bankruptcy is annulled.
  • The objecting creditors Dick & Dons Pty Ltd, B.W. Modern Interiors Pty Ltd, Fire Fighting Sprinkler Co Ltd, and Boral Johns Perry Industries Pty Ltd are to pay the applicants’ costs.