Totev v Sfar [2006] FCA 470

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Totev v Sfar [2006] FCA 470

BANKRUPTCY – counter claim against petitioning creditors – other claims – whether sequestration order should have been made – whether bankruptcy proceeding was an abuse of process – held that the exercise of power under s 52 of the Bankruptcy Act miscarried. Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s 40, 41 and 52 Amos v Lillyman Whitlam J 1 July 1998 unreported Brunninghausen v Glavanics [1998] FCA 230 Cain v Whyte (1933) 48 CLR 639 Chen v Bannerman [2001] FCA 160 Dowling v Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society Ltd (1915) 20 CLR 509 Ebert v Union Trustee Co of Australia Ltd (1960) 104 CLR 346 Glew v Harrowell (2003) 198 ALR 331 International Alpaca Management Pty Ltd v Evsar [1999] FCA 72 Ling v Commonwealth (1996) 68 FCR Ling v Enrobook Pty Ltd (1997) 74 FCR 19 Opie v Opie (1951) 84 CLR 362 Qun Xiong (Kenny) Yu v Todaytech Distribution Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 131 Re Black; Ex parte Jeffery (1932) 4 ABC 157 Re Brink; Ex parte Commercial Banking Co of Sydney Ltd (1980) 44 FLR 135 Re James; Ex parte Carter Holt Harvey Roofing (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) (1994) 51 FCR 14 Re Ling, Ex parte Ling v Commonwealth (1995) 58 FCR 129 Re Schmidt, Ex parte Anglewood Pty Ltd (1968) 13 FLR 111 Re Svir; Ex parte Commissioner of Taxation (1998) 83 FCR 314 Rozenbes v Kronhill (1956) 95 CLR 407 at 414 St George Bank v Helfenbaum [1999] FCA 1337 Vogwell v Vogwell (1939) 11 ABC 83 Williams v Spautz (1992) 174 CLR 509 Wren v Mahoney (1971-72) 126 CLR 212 Halsbury (3rd Ed Vol 2) VASIL TOTEV v MICHAEL SFAR & ANOR NSD 1246 OF 2005 ALLSOP J 5 MAY 2006 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY 1246 OF 2005

BETWEEN: VASIL TOTEV

APPELLANT

AND: MICHAEL SFAR

FIRST RESPONDENT

ENAYET SFAR