Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Lawindi, in the matter of Elkateb v Elkateb [2001] FCA 1527 COSTS – where proceedings rendered moot after judgment has been reserved PROCEDURE – service – creditor's petition – personal service – whether creditor's petition was properly served – whether document was put down in the respondent's presence – whether the respondent was informed of the nature of the documents served – sufficient that the nature of the unmasked documents was evident from the face of those documents – where service was within the precincts of the High Court – compliance with O 77 r 18 of the Federal Court Rules BANKRUPTCY – where debtor's petition filed after judgment reserved on a creditor's petition – where applicant creditor obtains an order for costs – whether applicant creditor's costs ought to be given priority Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 43(1) and (2) Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s 52(1)(b), s 55, s 109(1)(a) Federal Court Rules O 7 r 1, O 7 r 2, O 9 r 7(1), O 9 r 7(2), O 62 r 3(1), O 77 r 4(2), O 77 r 18, O 77 r 18A, O 77 r 19(2)
Clyne v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (1984) 154 CLR 589 at 598 followed Re Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs; Ex parte Lai Qin (1997) 186 CLR 622 followed Yates Property Corporation Pty Ltd v Boland (2000) 179 ALR 664 followed Thomson v Pheney (1832) 1 Dowling's Practice Cases 441 at 443 followed Re Ditfort; Ex parte Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (NSW); (1988) 19 FCR 347 at 360 followed Re Roberts, ex parte Evans (Hill J, 25 August 1989, unreported) followed Re Rosenberg; ex parte Westpac Banking Corporation (Spender J, 21 July 1993, unreported) followed Rogerson v Tchia (1995) 123 FLR 126 followed Taylor v Marmaras [1954] VLR 476 followed Re O'Sullivan; Ex parte O'Sullivan v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (1995) 57 FCR 145 followed Burrell v Connell (1998) 84 FCR 383 at 395 followed Bryant v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (Beaumont, Whitlam & Moore JJ, 24 November 1995, unreported) followed Re Hardwick [1976] Qd R 264 referred to IN THE MATTER OF MOHAMED SAFWAT ELKATEB WASFY LAWINDI v MOHAMED SAFWAT ELKATEB N 7991 OF 2000 STONE J 31 OCTOBER 2001 SYDNEY
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate