IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) GENERAL DIVISION ~ QLD P983 of 1987 BANKRUPTCY DISTRICT OF THE SOUTHERN ) DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND ) RE: EDWIN J. CARPENTER Debtor EX PARTE: CITICORP FINANCE PTY. LIMITED Creditor MINUTES OF ORDER JUDGE MAKING ORDER: PINCUS J. DATE OF ORDER: 11 NOVEMBER 1987 WHERE MADE: BRISBANE THE COURT ORDERS THAT: The petition be dismissed. NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 124 of the Bankruptcy Rules. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA GENERAL DIVISION —~ QLD P983 of 1987 BANKRUPTCY DISTRICT OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND —_~ RE: EDWIN J. CARPENTER Debtor EX PARTE: CITICORP FINANCE PTY. LIMITED Creditor PINCUS J. 11 NOVEMBER 1987 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT This is a petition for a sequestration order under the Bankruptcy Act 1966. The question is whether the petition was presented by Citicorp Finance Pty. Limited. It was signed by one Pauline Ann McLaughlin who swore in an affidavit of 22 June 1987: "IT am the Manager of CITICORP FINANCE PTY. LIMITED The deponent claimed to have authority under a power of attorney of 17 September 1986 to make the affidavit on 7 August 1987. The same deponent made a further affidavit including the assertion just quoted - i.e. "I am the Manager of Citicorp Finance Pty. Limited ..." On 8 October 1987 the Deputy Registrar issued a certificate under r.22 drawing attention to the need to hand up the power of attorney or a true copy to the Court on the return day. The following day Pauline Ann McLaughlin made a further affidavit to say, among other things, "I am the Recovery Manager for Queensland of Citicorp Finance Pty. Limited ..."" She referred to her last affidavit and said that since it was sworn, she had receive notice of revocation of her power of attorney and that the power of attorney "is now in favour of SYDNEY HERBERT HANNAH, the Operation Manager, and FREDERICK SPENCER SPACKMAN, the Manager of Mortgage Department for the Petitioner". Those gentlemen made an affidavit on the same day exhibiting a power of attorney and saying: "We note that the subject Petition was validly executed by Pauline Ann McLaughlin who at the time of execution of the said Petition held the said Power of Attorney which we now hold." One might have received the impression from this material that Pauline Ann McLaughlin was an attorney under a document naming her. That is apparently not so. Examination of the documents show that it vests stipulated powers in the holders of stipulated offices. There is mentioned in the fourth schedule of the document (item 14) the power to commence legal proceedings, a power which amongst others may be exercised by two people holding certain designated offices, not by one only. It seems that the difficulty has nothing to do with revocation, but was simply that Pauline Ann McLaughlin never had any authority. It was argued that the affidavit of Messrs. Hannah and Spackman, from which I have quoted, constitutes a ratification of the issue of the petition. It does not; it merely contains a false assertion that the petition was validly executed by Pauline Ann McLaughlin. Further, the power of attorney in evidence does not purport to give any of the holders of the designated offices power to ratify unauthorised acts of other officers. The petition must be dismissed. a Pcarts iy char thicandite Z preced ng Ec cra ate acces, of the reasons for er' berain of His Honour Mo iste Pincus ster Associate Dated 1 Nevembacty Se7