Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Coshott v Coshott [2013] FCA 907 Citation: Coshott v Coshott [2013] FCA 907
Parties: JAMES COSHOTT and LJILJANA COSHOTT v ROBERT GILBERT COSHOTT, A BANKRUPT and MAXWELL WILLIAM PRENTICE IN HIS CAPACITY AS TRUSTEE OF THE PROPERTY OF ROBERT GILBERT COSHOTT, A BANKRUPT
File number: NSD 1412 of 2009
Judge: BUCHANAN J
Date of judgment: 10 September 2013
Corrigendum 22 November 2013
Catchwords: BANKRUPTCY – whether bankrupt's interest in residential property part of bankrupt estate – whether bankrupt held property in trust for family superannuation fund – whether arrangements a sham – alternatively, whether bankrupt held property pursuant to resulting trust COSTS – whether indemnity costs should be awarded
Legislation: Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) Superannuation Entities (Taxation) Act 1987 (Cth) Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) Superannuation (Self Managed Superannuation Funds) Taxation Act 1987 Trustee Act 1925 (NSW)
Cases cited: Calverley v Green (1984) 155 CLR 242 Colgate Palmolive Co v Cussons Pty Ltd (1993) 118 ALR 248 Coshott v Burke [2012] FCA 517 Coshott v Burke [2013] FCA 155 Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Glengallan Investments Pty Ltd (2004) 218 CLR 471 Raftland Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2008) 238 CLR 516 Sharrment Pty Ltd v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (1988) 18 FCR 449
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