Lawman v Queensland Building Services Authority (No 2) [2000] FCA 174
Both the trustee and the petitioning creditor are entitled to have their costs of the annulment proceedings paid out of the bankrupt's estate with the same priority as referenced in s 109(1)(a) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), due to the petitioning creditor's successful role in preserving the estate for the general body of creditors.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 February 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment on Costs Following Dismissal of Appeal
- Outcome
- costs ordered
- Legal Topics
- ['priority of Costs' "distribution of Bankrupt's Estate" 'costs of Petitioning Creditor' 'costs of Trustee' 'annulment Proceedings']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Costs Following Dismissal of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the petitioning creditor and the trustee are entitled to have their costs of the annulment proceedings paid out of the bankrupt's estate and in what priority."]
Ratio Decidendi
Both the trustee and the petitioning creditor are entitled to have their costs of the annulment proceedings paid out of the bankrupt's estate with the same priority as referenced in s 109(1)(a) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), due to the petitioning creditor's successful role in preserving the estate for the general body of creditors.
Court Disposition
costs ordered
Orders
- ["The first respondent's costs be paid out of the bankrupt's estate with the same priority accorded by s 109(1)(a) the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) to the trustee's costs." "The second respondent's costs be paid out of the bankrupt's estate."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment