Gargan, Peter Alexander v The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy & Ors [1997] FCA 237

Gargan, Peter Alexander v The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy & Ors [1997] FCA 237

None of the second, third, and ninth respondents were parties to the original proceedings before Justice Kiefel and are not properly respondents to the appeal; they must be struck out as respondents. Naming them contravenes procedural rules and constitutes an improper collateral attack.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 1997
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Hearing and Determination of Motion to Strike Out Part of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal against second, third, and ninth respondents dismissed; leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['competency of Appeal' 'joinder of Parties' 'costs' 'abuse of Process' 'vexatious Proceedings']
['bankruptcy' 'civil Procedure'] ['competency of Appeal' 'joinder of Parties' 'costs' 'abuse of Process' 'vexatious Proceedings']

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

Notice of Motion / Hearing and Determination of Motion to Strike Out Part of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether non-parties to original proceedings may be made parties to the appeal' 'Whether proceedings constitute a collateral attack on prior decisions' 'Whether proceedings are vexatious']

Ratio Decidendi

None of the second, third, and ninth respondents were parties to the original proceedings before Justice Kiefel and are not properly respondents to the appeal; they must be struck out as respondents. Naming them contravenes procedural rules and constitutes an improper collateral attack.

Court Disposition

Appeal against second, third, and ninth respondents dismissed; leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal (so far as it relates to the second, third and ninth respondents) is dismissed.' 'The applicant pay the costs of the second, third and ninth respondents on a solicitor-client basis, to be taxed if not agreed.' 'If leave be necessary, leave to appeal from the order that the appeal so far as it relates to...