Re Slaminka, P. v. Ex parte Varshavsky, Z. [1985] FCA 225

Re Slaminka, P. v. Ex parte Varshavsky, Z. [1985] FCA 225

The applicant does not have a substantial and bona fide claim because there is no legal obligation on the respondent to share expenses incurred during their de facto relationship, and there is no present legal liability; therefore, there is no basis to set aside the bankruptcy notice.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Peter Slaminka; Respondent: Zoya Varshavsky
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 April 1985
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Bankruptcy Notice / Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Bankruptcy Notice, Counter Claim, Maintenance, De Facto Relationships, Legal Liability
Bankruptcy Bankruptcy Notice Counter Claim Maintenance De Facto Relationships Legal Liability

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Slaminka

Applicant

Zoya Varshavsky

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Bankruptcy Notice / Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has a substantial and bona fide counter-claim or set-off against the respondent sufficient to set aside the bankruptcy notice

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant does not have a substantial and bona fide claim because there is no legal obligation on the respondent to share expenses incurred during their de facto relationship, and there is no present legal liability; therefore, there is no basis to set aside the bankruptcy notice.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Applicant to pay respondent's costs