Richman v Australia Bank [1987] FCA 817

Richman v Australia Bank [1987] FCA 817

The debtor's admission as to owing a large amount is sufficient in substance for s.40(1)(h), the act of bankruptcy is made out, and all other statutory requirements for a sequestration order are satisfied.

Parties
Debtor: Robert A. Richman; Creditor: Australia Bank
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 1987
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Hearing of Creditor's Petition
Outcome
sequestration order made
Legal Topics
Sequestration Order, Act of Bankruptcy S.40(1)(h), Creditor's Petition
Bankruptcy Sequestration Order Act of Bankruptcy S.40(1)(h) Creditor's Petition

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert A. Richman

Debtor

Australia Bank

Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Hearing of Creditor's Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the debtor has committed an act of bankruptcy under s.40(1)(h) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966
  2. 2 Whether the requirements for a sequestration order are satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The debtor's admission as to owing a large amount is sufficient in substance for s.40(1)(h), the act of bankruptcy is made out, and all other statutory requirements for a sequestration order are satisfied.

Court Disposition

sequestration order made

Orders

  • A sequestration order is made against the estate of the debtor.
  • Max Christopher Donnelly is appointed as trustee of the estate.