Wharton v Official Receiver in Bankruptcy [2001] FCA 96

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Wharton v Official Receiver in Bankruptcy [2001] FCA 96

BANKRUPTCY – objection to discharge from bankruptcy by trustee under s 149D(1)(d) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – whether bankrupt failed to provide written information to trustee – whether pro bono legal services constitutes "benefit" – whether bankrupt knew of arrangement with regard to pro bono legal services – whether provision should be construed strictly – whether any requirement that information provided is true and accurate for purposes of objection provision. Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) ss 136L, 149A, 149B, 149C, 149D(1) Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 (Cth) s 136 Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) s 15AA Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44

McGoldrick v Official Trustee (1993) 47 FCR 547 at 553-554 referred to Inspector-General in Bankruptcy v Nelson (1998) 86 FCR 67 referred to Hill v Holmes (1999) 92 FCR 120 followed Win v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 56 referred to Re Woodman and Inspector General in Bankruptcy (1996) 40 ALD 800 referred to Browne v Dunn (1894) 6 R 67 referred to Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321 at 355-356 referred to Collector of Customs v Agfa-Gevaert Ltd (1996) 186 CLR 389 at 394 referred to M Aronson and B Dyer Judicial Review of Administrative Action (2nd ed 2000) at 158-162 STEPHEN LYNNE WHARTON v OFFICIAL RECEIVER IN BANKRUPTCY V 482 OF 2000 WEINBERG J 20 FEBRUARY 2001 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V482 of 2000

BETWEEN: STEPHEN LYNNE WHARTON

APPLICANT

AND: OFFICIAL RECEIVER IN BANKRUPTCY

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: WEINBERG J

DATE OF ORDER: 20 FEBRUARY 2001

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be allowed. 2. The notice of contention be dismissed. 3. The notice of objection dated 26 May 1999 and issued by the respondent with respect to the applicant's discharge from bankruptcy be set aside. 4. The decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal given on 8 June 2000 be set aside. 5. The respondent pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.