Agrillo, S. v. Codisposto, R. [1994] FCA 988

Agrillo, S. v. Codisposto, R. [1994] FCA 988

There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that there were reasonable grounds to expect that the debtor would obtain an order to set aside the consent orders for payment made by the Supreme Court. No stay of execution had been granted, nor further application made for such a stay, and the evidence did not support an exercise of the discretion to significantly extend time for compliance with the bankruptcy notice.

Parties
Applicant: Santino Agrillo; Respondent: Raffaele Codisposto
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 1994
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application / Application for Extension of Time for Compliance With Bankruptcy Notice
Outcome
Application dismissed (except as to limited extension)
Legal Topics
Application for Extension of Time, Bankruptcy Notice Compliance, Setting Aside Consent Orders
Bankruptcy Application for Extension of Time Bankruptcy Notice Compliance Setting Aside Consent Orders

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

Parties

Santino Agrillo

Applicant

Raffaele Codisposto

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Application / Application for Extension of Time for Compliance With Bankruptcy Notice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should exercise its discretion to extend time for compliance with a bankruptcy notice where the debtor has proceedings pending to set aside the orders for payment of the debt
  2. 2 Whether there is sufficient evidence to support the claim to set aside the orders

Ratio Decidendi

There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that there were reasonable grounds to expect that the debtor would obtain an order to set aside the consent orders for payment made by the Supreme Court. No stay of execution had been granted, nor further application made for such a stay, and the evidence did not support an exercise of the discretion to significantly extend time for compliance with the bankruptcy notice.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed (except as to limited extension)

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The time for compliance with the bankruptcy notice is extended for seven days from the date of this judgment.