Federal Court of Australia
~
Bankruptcy ~- application to annul bankruptcy under s.154(1)(a) of
Bankruptcy Act 1966 - whether sequestration order "ought not to
have been made".
CATCHWORDS
RE: COLIN MAXWELL MIDDLETON AND MARIE MICHELLE MIDDLETON
No. W1353 of 1986
Beaumont, J. Sydney
4 February 1987.
LY] x2
ao 52] YED [i] = STELI82 \u iy
TM pRADST AL Sedat 08
\ \ wISTRALES, "Pa OIEAL
%
we
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
GENERAL DIVISION
BANKRUPTCY DISTRICT OF NEW SOUTH WALES
No. W1353 of 1986
AND THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
RE: COLIN MAXWELL MIDDLETON and MARIE MICHELLE MIDDLETON
MINUTES OF ORDER
Judge making order: Beaumont, J.
Date order made: 4 February 1987
Where made: Sydney
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
l. 2.
Note:
Application dismissed
Costs reserved.
Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in
Bankruptcy Rule 124.
2.
appear and Wilcox J. made a sequestration order.
The affairs of the applicants are complex and it is not possible, at this stage, to indicate, in specifics, their assets and liabilities. A number of partnerships are involved and the applicants did not attend at the hearing of their application - they were represented by counsel and solicitor, although it should be noted that the applicants live in Tamworth and that Mr. Middleton's father, who lives on the central coast 1s seriously ill. However, 1t 1S common ground that in about June 1986, the applicants forwarded to their accountant, Mr. McCarthy, details of their liabilities and gave Mr. McCarthy instructions to pay certain liabilities out of funds then paid by the applicants into his firm's trust account. There 1s a dispute between the applicants and Mr. McCarthy as to the precise terms of his retainer. The applicants say that they directed Mr. McCarthy to pay the petitioning creditor the amount owed to it under its judgment. On the other hand, Mr. McCarthy says that his retainer was more general. According to him, his instructions were to pay all creditors who were pressing for payment so far as the funds entrusted to him would permit. Unfortunately, Mr. McCarthy, who also lives in Tamworth, was not available to give oral evidence and, as has been said, the applicants were not able to come to Sydney for the hearing. In the result, it is not possible to resolve this conflict of evidence. However, for reasons which will be given, even if I were to accept the applicants' version
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