Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Goo v Kim (No 2) [2023] FCA 1285 Appeal from: Kim v Goo [2022] FedCFamC2G 602
File number(s): NSD 743 of 2022
Judgment of: HALLEY J
Date of judgment: 26 October 2023
Catchwords: BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY – appeal – sequestration order made by primary judge – where primary judge relied on bankruptcy notice issued by respondent to appellant following failure to comply with specific performance order – whether appellant committed an act of bankruptcy under s 40(1)(g) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – whether specific performance order was stayed at the time bankruptcy notice was issued – appeal dismissed EQUITY – whether order for specific performance is not capable of immediate execution, without leave of the Court – where requirement to "apply to the Court to enforce an order" does not carry with it any implication that order is conditional
Legislation: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) ss 40, 41 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) ss 102, 103, 106, 138 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 39.1, 39.34
Cases cited: Australian Securities and Investments Commission v M101 Nominees Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 6) [2023] FCA 1276 Despot v Registrar General of New South Wales [2016] NSWCA 5 In the matter of Hoju Jobs Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 302 In the matter of Hoju Jobs Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] NSWSC 407 Lim v Comcare [2019] FCAFC 104 Penning v Steel Tube Supplies Pty Ltd (1988) 18 FCR 568 Sunbird Plaza Proprietary Limited v Maloney (1988) 166 CLR 245; [1988] HCA 11
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