Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Sockhill [2001] FCA 324

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Sockhill [2001] FCA 324

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION V BRUCE RICHARD SOCKHILL 7284 OF 2000 KIEFEL J BRISBANE 6 APRIL 2001

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY Q7284 OF 2000

IN THE MATTER OF BRUCE RICHARD SOCKHILL

BETWEEN: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION

APPLICANT

AND: BRUCE RICHARD SOCKHILL

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: KIEFEL J

DATE OF ORDER: 6 APRIL 2001

WHERE MADE: BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The estate of Mr Bruce Sockhill be sequestrated. 2. The Applicant creditor's costs to be taxed and paid from the estate of the debtor in accordance with the Bankruptcy Act 1966. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY Q7284 OF 2000

IN THE MATTER OF BRUCE RICHARD SOCKHILL

BETWEEN: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION

APPLICANT

AND: BRUCE RICHARD SOCKHILL

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: KIEFEL J

DATE: 6 APRIL 2001

PLACE: BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 Mr Sockhill's opposition to the petition filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation is now limited to one ground. The grounds formerly notified, and which included constitutional objections; issues concerning the ability of the Official Trustee to delegate; and the contention that he was and is solvent, have been abandoned. Even the grounds notified in the amended notice filed on 22 March 2001 that the bankruptcy notice is invalid - have now been further restricted to one point: whether a debtor in Mr Sockhill's position is likely to have been misled as to what he was required to do in order to comply with the bankruptcy notice. In short, the question is whether a debtor would likely be confused as to whether payment of the judgment sum notified, $41,281.16, would be sufficient compliance in a circumstance where the judgment annexed to the notice refers to costs having been awarded. 2 By a judgment of the District Court of Queensland, Brisbane, of 16 March 2000, Mr Sockhill was to pay the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation the sum of $41,281.16. It was also ordered that Mr Sockhill pay the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation "costs of the action including the application to be assessed". A copy of that judgment was attached to the bankruptcy notice served on Mr Sockhill. The notice was in the form required by Form 1 to the regulations to the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (and see s 41(2) and r 4.02). By the notice Mr Sockhill was advised that the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation claimed that he owed it "a debt of $41,281.16 as shown in the Schedule ("the debt")". It went on: "2. The creditor claims that the debt is due and payable by you. A copy of the judgment or order relied upon by the creditor is attached … 3. You are required, within 21 days after service on you of this Bankruptcy Notice: (a) to pay to the creditor the amount of the debt; or (b) to make an arrangement to the creditor's satisfaction for settlement of the debt." 3 Details were then provided as to whom and where payment of "the debt" could be made. 4 The schedule and the notes to it were in these terms: "Schedule Column 1 Column 2 1. Amount of judgment or order $41,281.16 plus 2. Legal costs if ordered to be paid and a specific amount was not included in the judgment or order (see Note 1, below) $0.00 plus 3. If claimed in this Bankruptcy Notice, interest accrued since the date of judgment or order (see Note 2, below) $0.00 4. Subtotal $41,281.16 less 5. Payments made and/or credits allowed since date of judgment or order $0.00 6. Total debt owing $41,281.16