MANNIGEL v HEWLETT PHELPS [1991] NSWCA 186

MANNIGEL v HEWLETT PHELPS [1991] NSWCA 186

The causes of action were indivisible and vested in the Official Receiver upon bankruptcy; the claimed damages were consequential upon breaches relating to property interests and not solely personal injury or wrong. Pursuant to s60(2) Bankruptcy Act, the proceedings remained stayed. The discharge from bankruptcy did not revest the causes of action in plaintiffs; the proper order was declaration of proceedings stayed, not entry of judgment.

Parties
Appellant: Mannigel; Respondent: Hewlett Phelps
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 June 1991
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Effect of Bankruptcy on Proceedings, Stay of Action Upon Bankruptcy, Personal Injury or Wrong Exclusion Under Bankruptcy Act, Vesting of Causes of Action in Trustee
Bankruptcy Professional Negligence Effect of Bankruptcy on Proceedings Stay of Action Upon Bankruptcy Personal Injury or Wrong Exclusion Under Bankruptcy Act Vesting of Causes of Action in Trustee

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mannigel

Appellant

Hewlett Phelps

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings against former solicitors for negligence and breach of contract are stayed upon bankruptcy under s60(2) Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether damages pleaded constitute a 'personal injury or wrong' to the bankrupt within s60(4)
  3. 3 Whether discharge from bankruptcy revests causes of action in plaintiffs

Ratio Decidendi

The causes of action were indivisible and vested in the Official Receiver upon bankruptcy; the claimed damages were consequential upon breaches relating to property interests and not solely personal injury or wrong. Pursuant to s60(2) Bankruptcy Act, the proceedings remained stayed. The discharge from bankruptcy did not revest the causes of action in plaintiffs; the proper order was declaration of proceedings stayed, not entry of judgment.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Appeal allowed in part.
  • Set aside the verdict and judgment for the defendants entered in the Common Law Division.