Herbert v R [1941] HCA 12

Herbert v R [1941] HCA 12

Obtaining a loan of money by fraudulent misrepresentation constitutes obtaining 'credit' by fraud under sec. 212(1)(a) of the Bankruptcy Act 1924-1933, regardless of whether negotiable instruments are given or whether the debt arises from goods, services, or money lent. The statute is general in its application and not limited to transactions for goods or services. Sentence was not excessive nor imposed by consideration of extraneous matters.

Parties
Appellant: Lionel Herbert; Respondent: The King; Creditor: Blanche Taylor
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence in the Federal Court of Bankruptcy Summarily to the High Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Obtaining of Credit, Loans as Credit Under Bankruptcy Law, Sentence Discretion
Criminal Law Bankruptcy Fraudulent Obtaining of Credit Loans as Credit Under Bankruptcy Law Sentence Discretion

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lionel Herbert

Appellant

The King

Respondent

Blanche Taylor

Creditor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence in the Federal Court of Bankruptcy Summarily to the High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does obtaining a loan of money constitute obtaining 'credit' by fraud under sec. 212(1)(a) of the Bankruptcy Act 1924-1933?
  2. 2 Is sec. 212(1)(a) limited to debts for goods/services sold or does it include money lent?
  3. 3 Was the sentence excessive or imposed by consideration of extraneous matters?

Ratio Decidendi

Obtaining a loan of money by fraudulent misrepresentation constitutes obtaining 'credit' by fraud under sec. 212(1)(a) of the Bankruptcy Act 1924-1933, regardless of whether negotiable instruments are given or whether the debt arises from goods, services, or money lent. The statute is general in its application and not limited to transactions for goods or services. Sentence was not excessive nor imposed by consideration of extraneous matters.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Conviction and sentences affirmed.
  • Appeal dismissed with costs.