Re Humfrey & Anor Ex parte Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [1994] FCA 952
Federal Court of Australia
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
\ | JUDGMENT No. om 2S2uf tt.
CATCHWORDS
BANKRUPTCY ~- removal of the Official Trustee as trustee of
Bankrupts' estate - whether s 179(1)(a) applies to Official
Trustee.
Bankruptcy Act 1966, ss 159, 160, 177, 178, 179, 179B.
Cooper Brookes (Woollongong) Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of
Taxation (1981) 147 CLR 297.
Muir v Bradley (1984) 57 ALR 155.
Re Humfrey & Anor; Ex parte Official Trustee in Bankruptcy
No. VB 2925 of 1991
Judge: Heerey J
Date: 8 December 1994
Place: Melbourne
IN THE FEDERAL COUR' F_ AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT ISTRY No. VB 2925 of 1991
eee
GENERAL DIVISION
RE: JACK PETER HUMFREY and
VERNA ALISON HUMFREY
Bankrupts
EX PARTE: THE BANKRUPTS
Applicants
OFFICIAL TRUSTEE IN TCY
Respondent
JUDGE: Heerey J
DATE: 8 December 1994
PLACE: Melbourne
MINUTE OF ORDER
THE COURT ORDERS :
1. Declare that s.179 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966
(Commonwealth) applies to the Official Trustee as trustee
of a bankrupt estate.
2. The bankrupts have leave to amend generally the application
dated 7 October 1994.
3. Adjourn hearing for directions to 14 December 1994.
4. The applicants' costs in the trial of the preliminary
issue, including reserved costs, be paid by the respondent.
and
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
No. VB 2925 of 1991
RE: JACK PETER HUMFREY and
VERNA ALISON HUMFRE
Bankrupts
EX PARTE: THE BANKRUPTS
Applicants
OFFICIAL TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY
Respondent
JUDGE : Heerey J
DATE: 8 December 1994
PLACE: Melbourne
ONS FOR JUDGMENT
A sequestration order was made against the estate of the
applicants on 2 October 1991. There was no appointment of a
registered trustee as trustee of the estate and consequently the
Official Trustee became trustee: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (the
Act), s.58(1)(a).
By an application dated 7 October 1994 the applicants sought
orders that the "Official Receiver" (sic) be removed as trustee
of the estate, that one Clive Peter White be appointed trustee,
and that a declaration be made that the debtors "be discharged
as bankrupts as of 3 October 1994".
Deputy Registrar Agnew has referred the application to the Court
for the hearing of the threshold issue as to the applicability
to the Official Trustee of s.179 of the Act, which provides for
the removal of trustees. Section 179 provides:
on
" (1) The Court may, on the application of the Registrar, the
Inspector-General a creditor or the bankrupt, inquire into the
conduct of a trustee in relation to a bankruptcy and may do one
or both of the following:-
(a) remove the trustee from office; and
(b) make such order as it thinks proper.
(2) The Registrar, the Inspector~General or a creditor may at
any time require a trustee to answer an inquiry in relation to
the bankrupt's estate or affairs."
In my opinion s.179 does apply to the Official Trustee.
The starting point is the language of s.179(1) itself which
refers to "the conduct of a trustee in relation to a bankruptcy".
The natural meaning of that expression extends to any trustee of
a bankrupt estate. In s.5 "the trustee" is defined to mean "(a)
In relation to a bankruptcy - the trustee of the estate of the
bankrupt". Since the Official Trustee can be such a trustee, and
is the trustee of the present applicants' estate, the Official
Trustee would seem to be subject to the power of removal
conferred by s.179(1)(a). The contrary argument involves reading
s.179(1) as though it included the words "(other than the
Official Trustee)" after the expression "remove the trustee".
Given that clear meaning, Counsel for the respondent had to argue
that the ordinary meaning is "... so irrational that the Court
is forced to the conclusion that the draftsman has made a
mistake...". He faced the difficulty that
«+. if the language of the statutory provision is clear and
unambiguous, and is consistent and harmonious with the other
provisions of the enactment, and can be intelligently applied to
the subject matter with which it deals, it must be given its
ordinary and grammatical meaning, even if it leads to a result
that may seem inconvenient or unjust."
Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of
3.
Taxation (1981) 147 CLR 297 at 304-305 per Gibbs CJ, see also per
Mason and Wilson JJ at 319-321.
Other provisions of the Act support the applicants' contention.
Section 179 is found in Division 4A of Part VIII which consists
of ss.177, 178 and 179. Section 177 provides that the trustee
is to
"have regard to any lawful directions given by resolution of the
creditors at a meeting of the creditors or by the committee of
inspection".
Section 178 provides that the bankrupt, a creditor or any other
person affected by any act, omission or decision of the trustee
May apply to the Court and the Court may make such order as it
thinks just and equitable. There would be no rational reason for
treating either ss.177 or 178 as only applying to trustees other
than the Official Trustee. It is equally important that
creditors of estates of which the Official Trustee is trustee
(and also, in the case of s.178, the bankrupt, or other persons
affected) should have the rights conferred by those sections.
Accordingly, it is not easy to see why Parliament should have
intended that s.179, above of the provisions in Division 4A,
should not apply to the Official Trustee.
Further, where the Act seeks to exclude the Official Trustee from
a provision applying to trustees generally, such exclusion is
specifically made. For example, s.169(4) requires trustees to pay
moneys into a bank account opened and kept in the name of the
estate, but sub-section (4) provides that the section does not
=e
4.
apply in relation to the Official Trustee.
Likewise s.179B provides for examination on oath before the
Registrar of certain persons about '"'examinable matters in
relation to the relevant trustee". Those persons are specified
by s.179B(1) to include:
(a) in any case - the relevant trustee
(b) if the relevant trustee is the Official Trustee - the
Official Receiver.
The principal contention of the respondent was based on s.160
which provides:
"If at any time there is no registered trustee who is the trustee
of the estate of the bankrupt, the Official Trustee shall, by
force of this section, be the trustee of the estate."
Accordingly it was said that it would be irrational if the Court
were able to remove the respondent as trustee and then find that
by virtue of s.160 the Official Trustee was immediately
reinstated. But Counsel for the debtors argued that while
s.179(1)(b) did not empower the Court to appoint another trustee
(Muir v Bradley (1984) 57 ALR 155 at 157), there remained s.159
which enabled creditors at a meeting of creditors to fill any
vacancy in the office of trustee. In particular s.159(3)
provides:
"For the purpose of this section, an office of trustee shall be
deemed to be vacant notwithstanding that it is for the time being
filled by the Official Trustee by reason of the operation of
section 160."
It is conceivable, although unlikely, that a meeting of creditors
5.
might decline to appoint a registered trustee even though the
Official Trustee had been removed by the Court. However, the
possibility of this hypothetical impasse is not enough in my
opinion to require the Court to give the words of s.179 other
than their clear meaning.
It was agreed that the application should be amended by
substituting "Official Trustee" for "Official Receiver" and
deleting ground 2, which seeks the appointment of Mr White.
Counsel for the applicants agreed they should specify the grounds
on which the removal is sought and the further orders sought.
I shall simply make a declaration that s.179 applies to the
Official Trustee as trustee of a bankrupt estate, grant leave to
amend generally and adjourn the hearing for directions on 14
December 1994.
Since this issue was resolved in favour of the debtors there will
be an order that the costs of the trial of the preliminary issue
be paid by the respondent.
I certify that this and the
preceding four (4) pages are
a true copy of the reasons
for judgment of his Honour
Mr Justice Heerey
Dated 8 December 1994
dw, ,
Associate
atdr
Counsel for the applicants:
Solicitor for the applicants:
Counsel for the respondent:
Solicitor for the respondent:
Date of hearing:
R S§ Randall
Swersky & Velos
G T Bigmore QC
Smith & Emmerton
25 November 1994
* JUDGES' CHAMBERS
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSRALIA
450 LITTLE BOURKE STREET
hy AUBTRALIA ut MELBOURNE, 3000
8 December 1994
Sonia Cornale
Federal Court of Australia
Principal Registry
Law Courts Building
Queens Square
SYDNEY NSW 2000
Dear Sonia
Re: Humf: rev ficial Trustee in Ba £C
No. VB 2925 of 1991
I enclose a copy of the judgment delivered by his Honour
Justice Heerey in the above matter today (8 December 1994).
A diskette record of the catchwords, minutes and reasons for
judgment is also enclosed.
This judgment is for general distribution.
Regards
David Brennan
Associate to Heerey J
enc.