Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Du Bray v ACW [2020] FCA 1142 Appeal from: ACW v Du Bray (No 2) [2020] FCA 994
File number: NSD 800 of 2020
Judge: STEWART J
Date of judgment: 3 August 2020
Catchwords: BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY – interlocutory application – stay of sequestration order sought under s 52(3) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – stay of sequestration order sought under r 36.08 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – distinction between staying a sequestration order and staying proceedings under a sequestration order – consideration of relevant principles – whether arguable point on appeal – balance of convenience – bankrupt able to quickly prosecute appeal – possible effect on the maintenance of litigation in the Family Court of Australia – where bankrupt is a director of companies – whether bankruptcy disqualifies the bankrupt from managing companies under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) even during stay of proceedings – balance of convenience not supportive of a stay – stay application dismissed
Legislation: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) ss 5(1) 37(2), 43(2), 47(1), 52(3), 58(1), 109(1), 122, 153B Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 201B, 206B, 206GAB, 206G Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 28 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 36.08
Cases cited: Alexander v Cambridge Credit Corp Ltd (1985) 2 NSWLR 685 BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt [1980] 1 NSWLR 496 Bryant v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1996] HCA 3; 134 ALR 460 Culleton v Balwyn Nominees Pty Ltd [2017] FCAFC 8; 343 ALR 632 Daly v Watson [1994] FCA 361; 50 FCR 544 Damberg v Damberg [2001] NSWCA 87; 52 NSWLR 492 De Robillard v Carver [2007] FCAFC 73; 159 FCR 38 Dimitriou v Pineview Property Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 2123 Endresz v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2014] FCA 1139 Mehajer v Weston (Trustee), in the matter of Mehajer [2018] FCA 608 Pattison v Hadjimouratis [2006] FCAFC 153; 155 FCR 226 Re Cirillo; Ex parte Commissioner of Taxation [1992] FCA 408; 36 FCR 279 Re Watts [2011] FCA 1185; 284 ALR 403 Simon v Vincent J O'Gorman Pty Ltd (1979) 27 ALR 619
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