Young v Hughes Trueman Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1176

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal Against Refusal to Set Aside Bankruptcy Notice / Federal Court Application Under R 36.05 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth)

Legal Issues

1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should receive an extension of time to file a notice of appeal from orders of the Federal Circuit Court dismissing her application to set aside a bankruptcy notice.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had sufficient merit, including whether there was evidence of an alleged conspiracy involving the respondents.' 'Whether the applicant had a counter-claim, set-off or cross demand equal to or exceeding the costs order on which the bankruptcy notice was based for the purposes of s 40(1)(g) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth).' 'Whether the bankruptcy notice was an abuse of process issued for improper collateral purposes.' 'Whether the primary judge denied procedural fairness or exhibited apprehended or actual bias.' 'Whether the primary judge erred in rejecting or limiting affidavit evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the proposed appeal had no merit. The costs order on which the bankruptcy notice was based could not be impugned; the asserted costs claim against the respondents had no realistic prospect of establishing a counter-claim, set-off or cross demand equal to or exceeding that costs order; and there was no evidence capable of establishing the alleged conspiracy or any improper collateral purpose in issuing the bankruptcy notice. The remaining proposed grounds concerning reasons, procedural fairness, bias and evidence also had no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

• ['The application for an extension of time is dismissed.' "The applicant must pay the respondents' costs as agreed or assessed."]