Re Pease, Raymond Victor Ex Parte Malser Pty Ltd v Pease, Raymond Victor [1997] FCA 147

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA No. VP 1039 of 1996 EXERCISING FEDERAL JURISDICTION IN BANKRUPTCY BANKRUPTCY DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF VICTORIA RE : RAYMOND VICTOR PEASE Judgment Debtor EX PARTE: MALSER PTY LIMITED Applicant RAYMOND VICTOR PEASE Respondent COURT: NORTHROP J DATE: 26 FEBRUARY 1997 PLACE: MELBOURNE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT This is the hearing of a petition brought by the judgment creditor against the judgment debtor based upon a bankruptcy notice dated 13 June 1996. The petition alleges an act of bankruptcy occurring on 8 August 1996, but it appears that date was in error. In fact the act of bankruptcy occurred on 7 August 1996, the bankruptcy notice, being a 21 day notice, having been served on 17 July 1996. The debtor has given notice of opposition to the making of a sequestration order and the ground of the objection is:

"That the debtor has not committed any act of bankruptcy as the Bankruptcy Notice relied upon by the Judgment Creditor is invalid as it does not comply with requirements of the Act.

PARTICULARS

1. The bankruptcy notice is based upon and requires compliance with more than one judgment order. 2. It wrongly refers to the order of Master Bruce as a source of the debtor's liability to pay the amount claimed."

The only substantive issue argued before the Court in opposition to the granting of the petition was based on the two grounds referred to in the notice of opposition. In order to understand the grounds of opposition, reference is made first to the bankruptcy notice itself. Essentially, it is in the required form. It is directed to the debtor, it refers to the fact that the creditor: " .... has claimed that the sum of $149,219.74 and no more" [being made up of the Order of $148,417.10 and $749.64 being interest calculated on the Order from 29 May 1996 to 11 June 1996 at the rates prescribed under the Penalty Interest Rates Act 1983 (Vic.) any further claim for interest being abandoned] is due by you to it under a final Order obtained by it against you in the Supreme Court at Melbourne on 28 May 1996 being a final Order made by Master Bruce, the Taxing Master in respect of costs ordered to be paid by you pursuant to the Orders of Master Kings made 2, 4 and 11 November 1994 and the Order of the Honourable Mr Justice Hansen made 22 November 1995, the execution of which has not been stayed."