Weiss, Re Z. Ex Parte Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [1986] FCA 395

Weiss, Re Z. Ex Parte Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [1986] FCA 395

Adjournment is refused because the court, not the creditors or the trustee alone, controls administration in bankruptcy, and pending compromise or change of trustee does not warrant an adjournment; leave to intervene is refused as there is no statutory right or appropriate discretion to permit a creditor to appear in this application.

Parties
Bankrupt: Zdenek Weiss; Applicant: Official Trustee in Bankruptcy; Creditor (applicant for Leave to Appear): Zinaida Gorelick; Creditor (assignor of Debt): Amev Finance Limited (formerly United Dominions Corporation Limited); Proposed Trustee: Mr Walker
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 August 1986
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application / Interlocutory (adjournment and Leave to Appear)
Outcome
adjournment application and application for leave to appear both refused
Legal Topics
Trustee Appointment, Creditor Intervention, Adjournment, Compromise, Court Control in Bankruptcy
Bankruptcy Trustee Appointment Creditor Intervention Adjournment Compromise Court Control in Bankruptcy

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zdenek Weiss

Bankrupt

Official Trustee in Bankruptcy

Applicant

Zinaida Gorelick

Creditor (applicant for Leave to Appear)

Amev Finance Limited (formerly United Dominions Corporation Limited)

Creditor (assignor of Debt)

Mr Walker

Proposed Trustee

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Application / Interlocutory (adjournment and Leave to Appear)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adjournment should be granted to allow possible compromise between bankrupt and creditors
  2. 2 Whether an assignee of a creditor's debt is entitled to intervene in a trustee's application under s.77(e)

Ratio Decidendi

Adjournment is refused because the court, not the creditors or the trustee alone, controls administration in bankruptcy, and pending compromise or change of trustee does not warrant an adjournment; leave to intervene is refused as there is no statutory right or appropriate discretion to permit a creditor to appear in this application.

Court Disposition

adjournment application and application for leave to appear both refused

Orders

  • adjournment refused
  • leave for creditor to appear refused