Re Harris, G.R. v. General Machinery & Equipment [1987] FCA 123

Adjournment is necessary to provide the judgment creditor with opportunity to respond to late evidence produced by the debtor and to resolve doubts about the correct liable party for the debt.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 13 March 1987
Procedural Posture: Bankruptcy Sequestration Petition / Adjourned Hearing
Outcome: Case adjourned for hearing
Legal Topics: ['sequestration Order' 'going Behind a Judgment' 'liability for Debt']

['bankruptcy'] ['sequestration Order' 'going Behind a Judgment' 'liability for Debt']

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

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Sequestration Petition / Adjourned Hearing

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether Garry R. Harris is the correct judgment debtor for the debt claimed by General Machinery and Equipment' 'Whether there is sufficient reason to go behind the judgment against Garry R. Harris in bankruptcy proceedings']

Ratio Decidendi

Adjournment is necessary to provide the judgment creditor with opportunity to respond to late evidence produced by the debtor and to resolve doubts about the correct liable party for the debt.

Court Disposition

Case adjourned for hearing

Orders

['The matter be adjourned for hearing to Friday, 27 March 1987 at 9.45 a.m.']