Allan Kendrick Dean v Lionel Barrie Woodward [1984] FCA 442
The applicants were not discharged by operation of law in 1981 because the objections to discharge did not lapse as per s.72(2) of the Bankruptcy Amendment Act 1980; circumstances of the case, passage of time, absence of moral censure in incurring debts, and family considerations warranted granting discharge despite unsatisfactory aspects.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 December 1984
- Procedural Posture
- Bankruptcy Discharge Application / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- applications for discharge granted
- Legal Topics
- ['application for Discharge' 'objection to Discharge' 'operation of Law' 'grounds of Objection' "court's Discretion"]
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Discharge Application / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the applicants were discharged from bankruptcy by operation of law under s.149 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 as amended' "Whether the Official Trustee's objections to discharge were valid and/or had lapsed" "Matters relevant to the Court's discretion in discharge applications"]
Ratio Decidendi
The applicants were not discharged by operation of law in 1981 because the objections to discharge did not lapse as per s.72(2) of the Bankruptcy Amendment Act 1980; circumstances of the case, passage of time, absence of moral censure in incurring debts, and family considerations warranted granting discharge despite unsatisfactory aspects.
Court Disposition
applications for discharge granted
Orders
- ['There be an order of discharge in each case' 'The bankrupts pay the costs of the Official Trustee of these applications including reserved costs and the costs of the proceedings before the Court on 5 November and today']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment