Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Boensch v Somerville Legal [2021] FCAFC 79 Appeal from: Somerville Legal v Boensch [2019] FCCA 3637
File number: NSD 2088 of 2019
Judgment of: KATZMANN, MARKOVIC AND ABRAHAM JJ
Date of judgment: 26 May 2021
Catchwords: BANKRUPTCY – appeal from orders made by the Federal Circuit Court – where primary judge made a sequestration order against appellant's estate – whether primary judge denied appellant procedural fairness – where appellant is self-represented – where primary judge did not advise appellant of his right to cross-examine – where appellant filed material with the Court – where material not before primary judge – where only single copy of material available between appellant and primary judge at hearing – where appellant required to make submissions without the benefit of his copy of the material – where no opportunity for trial judge to have fully read the appellant's material – where appellant not informed at outset of hearing of time available to make submissions – where additional time to make submissions permitted on an ad hoc basis – appeal allowed BANKRUPTCY – sequestration orders – where sequestration order made by primary judge is to be set aside – whether creditor's petition has lapsed by reason of s 52(4) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – where more than 12 months lapsed since presentation of creditor's petition – where sequestration order made within 12 months of presentation of creditor's petition – creditor's petition has not lapsed BANKRUPTCY – application by trustees in bankruptcy for the Court to exercise its discretion to annul the appellant's bankruptcy under s 153B of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) instead of setting aside the sequestration order – where trustees seek entitlement to remuneration and expenses to date under s 153B of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) in administering the appellant's bankrupt estate – where trustees chose to intervene in appeal to advance their case but did not participate in substance of appeal – where trustees proceeded to incur costs in administering the appellant's bankrupt estate despite knowledge of this appeal – application dismissed
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate