Calabro, T. v. Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [1988] FCA 247
Federal Court of Australia
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
JU
SOMINY Mo. PA. | Bn
I co OF _AU: IA )
)
CIst FED! J ICTIo ) No. B.2614 of 1987
)
BANKRUPTCY )
ej F STATE OF VICTORIA
TONY CALABRO
A Debtor
and
¥_CO. SSTONER OF TAXATION
A Creditor
COURT: NORTHROP J.
DATE : 16 MARCH 1988
PLACE: MELBOURNE
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 10 February 1988 the Deputy Commissioner of
Taxation for the Commonwealth of Australia served a
bankruptcy notice on the debtor, Tony Calabro. The
bankruptcy notice was based upon paragraph 40(1)(g), of the
Bankruptcy Act 1966, and it claimed that there was a total
amount of $7216.19 owing by the debtor to the Commissioner
under a judgment obtained by the Commissioner in the County
Court of Victoria on 27 February 1984. The amount claimed is
2.
the amount of that judgment debt, together with costs,
reduced by way of credits totalling some $4090, together with
interest on the judgment debt from 5 December 1984 to 17
November 1987. Any claim for further interest has been
waived.
The bankruptcy notice was in conformity with the
Act and rules and required the debtor to do one of a number
of things within 14 days of the date of service of the
bankruptcy notice. The debtor was required, within 14 days
after service, to either pay the sum as claimed by the
judgment creditor or to secure the payment of the sum
referred to, to the satisfaction of the Court. The debtor
has done neither of those two things. The bankruptcy notice
also gave notice, in conformity with the Act and rules, that
if within the period set out above - that is the 14 days -
the debtor fails either to comply with the requirements of
the notice - and I quote:-
"or to satisfy the Federal Court of
Australia that you have a counter-clain,
set-off or cross demand equal to or
exceeding the sum specified in paragraph
(a), being a counter-claim set-off or
cross demand that you could not have set
up in the action in which the judgment
(or order) was obtained, you will have
committed an act of bankruptcy on which
bankruptcy proceedings may he taken
against you."
By affidavit sworn on 17 February 1988, within that
period of 14 days, the debtor claimed that he had such a
set-off, counter-claim or cross-demand which he could not
have brought in those County Court proceedings. As a result
3.
of sub-section 41(7) of the Act the effect of filing that
affidavit is to prevent the bankruptcy notice taking effect
at the expiration of the 14 days after service. The Court is
then required to determine whether it 18 satisfied that the
debtor has such a counter-claim, set-off or cross-demand as
alleged.
The affidavit sets out material which is directed
to what had occurred in relation to subsequent assessments
and discussions which had taken place between the Deputy
Commissioner and the debtor in relation to those assessments
which have been issued for periods after 1984. It has no
regard at all to the judgment debt and in my opinion there
was nothing in the affidavit itself or in what has been said
by the debtor in Court today to show that at the time of that
judgment debt he had a counter-claim, set-off or cross-demand
which he could not have brought in the County Court.
The judgment debt has been entered and has remained
in existence since 1384 - it was entered on 5 December 1984.
What has happened subsequently relates to other dealings
between the parties and does not affect the existence of that
debt or any cross-claim that could have been brought in those
proceedings but could not be brought because of other
factors: for instance, the nature of a claim in existence at
that time, or other like matters.
Accordingly, I am not satisfied that the debtor has
a counter-claim, set-off or cross-demand that could not have
been brought in the County Court proceedings in which
judgment has been entered. As a result of that finding
Act now operates amd the act of bankruptcy, under
Bankruptcy Act, is to be determined in accordance with
order made today.
I certify that this and the three (3)
preceding pages are a true copy of the
Reasons for Judgment herein of the
Honourable Mr. Justice R M Northrog)
Shorow PF ADUIOY Associate
Dated: I More 1988
the
the
the
the
Related laws
No related documents linked yet.
You've got 21 of 22 free Acts left this visit. Sign up anytime for Facts, Related, and study briefs too.