Re Schofield, Anthony James & Anor Ex Parte Rangott, William Balfour v P & B Barron Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 39

Re Schofield, Anthony James & Anor Ex Parte Rangott, William Balfour v P & B Barron Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 39

The Bankruptcy Act 1966 provides a specific regime for the use of s81 examination transcripts, limited by s81(17) to proceedings in which the examined person is a party. Sections 64, 67 and 190(3) of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) cannot be used to expand that regime. P & B Barron Pty Ltd was the only respondent in the principal proceedings, but it was not shown to be an associated entity or otherwise an examinable person, and any oral evidence by Mr Barron or a proper officer was not the evidence of the company. Therefore none of the transcripts was admissible.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 February 1997
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Proceeding Concerning Admissibility of Evidence in Principal Proceedings Under Ss120 and 121 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 / Preliminary Evidentiary Ruling Before Hearing of the Principal Proceedings
Outcome
The Court ruled that none of the s81 transcripts the trustee sought to use in evidence in the principal proceedings were admissible.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Transcripts of Examinations Under S81 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966' 'interaction Between the Bankruptcy Act 1966 and Evidence Act 1995 (cth)' 'first Hand Hearsay Exceptions' 'examination of a Company or Proper Officer' 'associated Entity Under the Bankruptcy Act 1966']
['bankruptcy' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Transcripts of Examinations Under S81 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966' 'interaction Between the Bankruptcy Act 1966 and Evidence Act 1995 (cth)' 'first Hand Hearsay Exceptions' 'examination of a Company or Proper Officer' 'associated Entity Under the Bankruptcy Act 1966']

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Proceeding Concerning Admissibility of Evidence in Principal Proceedings Under Ss120 and 121 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 / Preliminary Evidentiary Ruling Before Hearing of the Principal Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether transcripts of evidence given at a s81 examination could be admitted in the principal Bankruptcy Act proceedings under s81(17) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966.' 'Whether ss64, 67 or 190(3) of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) could provide a basis for admitting the s81 transcripts despite the Bankruptcy Act regime.' 'Whether evidence given by Mr Barron or the proper officer could be treated as evidence of P & B Barron Pty Ltd for the purposes of s81(17).' 'Whether P & B Barron Pty Ltd had been shown to be an examinable person or associated entity under the Bankruptcy Act 1966.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Bankruptcy Act 1966 provides a specific regime for the use of s81 examination transcripts, limited by s81(17) to proceedings in which the examined person is a party. Sections 64, 67 and 190(3) of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) cannot be used to expand that regime. P & B Barron Pty Ltd was the only respondent in the principal proceedings, but it was not shown to be an associated entity or otherwise an examinable person, and any oral evidence by Mr Barron or a proper officer was not the evidence of the company. Therefore none of the transcripts was admissible.

Court Disposition

The Court ruled that none of the s81 transcripts the trustee sought to use in evidence in the principal proceedings were admissible.

Orders

  • ['None of the transcripts the trustee seeks to use in evidence in the principal proceedings are admissible under s81(17) of the Bankruptcy Act or by virtue of s64 and s67 or 190(3) of the Evidence Act.']