Massih v Esber [2008] FCA 1452

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Massih v Esber [2008] FCA 1452

BANKRUPTCY –application to set aside bankruptcy notice – need for Court to be "satisfied" – counter-claim, set-off or cross demand – could not have been set up as a matter of law in the action or proceeding in which judgment or order obtained – application allowed

Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), ss 40(1)(g), 41(3)(b), 41(7) Bankruptcy Regulations 1996 (Cth), reg 4.02 Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW), s 368(1), (5) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), Part 36 r 10

Cassegrain v CTK Engineering [2008] NSWSC 457 cited Chesson v Smith (1992) 35 FCR 594 considered Cirillo v Consolidated Press Property Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 139 followed Clark v UDC Finance Ltd [1985] 2 NZLR 636 followed Dekkan v Evans [2008] FCA 1004 followed Dekkan v Macquarie Leasing Pty Ltd (No 2) [2008] FCA 1431 followed Dimasi v Nangiloc Colignan Farms Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 308, 239 ALR 330 followed Esber v Massih [2006] NSWSC 321 cited Franks v Warringah Council [2003] FCA 1047, 131 FCR 287 followed Guss v Johnstone [2000] HCA 26, 171 ALR 598 followed In re A Bankruptcy Notice [1934] 1 Ch 431 considered In re a Debtor [1914] 3 KB 726 followed In re Judd, Ex parte Pike (1924) 24 SR (NSW) 537 followed Lau v Accord Pacific Properties Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 795 followed Muriniti v Lyons [2004] NSWSC 135 followed Nath v Clipway Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 625 cited O'Brien v Doherty [2008] NSWSC 205 cited Pepper v McNiece (1941) 64 CLR 642 followed Re Black; Ex parte Jeffery (1932) 4 ABC 157 followed Re Brinks; Ex parte Commercial Banking Co of Sydney Ltd (1980) 30 ALR 433, 44 FLR 135 followed Re Brown, Ex parte Peisley Brothers (1892) 3 BC (NSW) 13 followed Re Cox (1934) 7 ABC 98 followed Re Deen, Ex parte Deen v Muller (1995) 58 FCR 441 followed Re Duncan, Ex parte Modlin (1917) 17 SR (NSW) 152 followed Re Gibbs; Ex parte Triscott (1995) 65 FCR 80, 133 ALR 718 followed Re Glew; Glew v Harrowell [2003] FCA 373, 198 ALR 331 followed Re Gould; Ex parte Skinner (1983) 72 FLR 393 considered Re Griffin, Ex parte Soutar (1890) 1 BC (NSW) 29 followed Re Jocumsen (1929) 1 ABC 82 considered Re Ling; Ex parte Ling v Commonwealth (1995) 58 FCR 129 followed Re Pannowitz; Ex parte Wilson (1975) 38 FLR 184 followed Re Rivett; Ex parte Edward Fay Ltd (1932) 5 ABC 182 followed Re Sterling; Ex parte Esanda Ltd (1980) 30 ALR 77 followed Re Stokvis (1934) 7 ABC 53 followed Re Vicini; Ex parte E A Sealey & Co (1982) 64 FLR 323 followed Re Willats; Ex parte Nissan Finance Corp Ltd (1991) 31 FCR 206 followed Re Zakrzewski; Zakrzewski v Rodgers [2000] FCA 1187, 178 ALR 694 followed Reasonable Endeavours Pty Ltd v Dennehy [2001] FCA 188, 107 FCR 144 followed Ryan v Hansen [2000] NSWSC 354, 49 NSWLR 184 followed Smart v Esanda Finance Corp Ltd [2000] FCA 235 followed Tzovaras v Nufeno Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 1152 followed Van Leeuwen v Bank of Western Australia Ltd [2001] FCA 1826 followed Wentworth v Rogers [2006] NSWCA 145, 66 NSWLR 474 followed