Richardson v Leonard Cohen & Co [2008] FCA 1392

Richardson v Leonard Cohen & Co [2008] FCA 1392

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant did not demonstrate substantial or genuine reason to go behind the default judgment: the allegations of a success fee and champerty were not genuinely made or were unsupported by admissible (non-hearsay) evidence, and the background litigation conduct weakened the credibility of the appellant's position. The primary judge's discretion was properly exercised under the statutory provisions, and no miscarriage was shown on appeal.

Parties
Appellant: Phillip Richardson; Respondent: Leonard Cohen & Co
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal From a Sequestration Order by the Federal Magistrates Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Creditor's Petition, Default Judgment, Discretion to Go Behind Judgment, Champerty, Maintenance, Costs Agreement, Sequestration Order
Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Creditor's Petition Default Judgment Discretion to Go Behind Judgment Champerty Maintenance Costs Agreement +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phillip Richardson

Appellant

Leonard Cohen & Co

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal From a Sequestration Order by the Federal Magistrates Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to go behind a default judgment when considering a creditor's petition under Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) ss 44(1), 52(1)
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had shown substantial reasons to question whether there was a true debt owed to the petitioning creditor behind the judgment
  3. 3 Whether the pleaded defence of champerty, maintenance, or illegality was supported by genuine or admissible evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant did not demonstrate substantial or genuine reason to go behind the default judgment: the allegations of a success fee and champerty were not genuinely made or were unsupported by admissible (non-hearsay) evidence, and the background litigation conduct weakened the credibility of the appellant's position. The primary judge's discretion was properly exercised under the statutory provisions, and no miscarriage was shown on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal to be taxed, such costs to be paid as part of the petitioning creditor's costs out of the appellant's bankrupt estate.