Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Ghosh v Newton (Trial Judgment) [2024] FCA 898 File number: NSD 408 of 2024
Judgment of: JACKMAN J
Date of judgment: 1 August 2024
Catchwords: BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY – application for annulment of bankruptcy – where applicant relies on matters that came into existence after sequestration order – where separate application for annulment previously refused – application dismissed BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY – application to set aside a notice issued pursuant to s 139ZQ of the Bankruptcy Act TORTS – accusation of theft – where no cogent basis on which torts of detinue, conversion or trespass could be established
Legislation: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) ss 120, 153B, 139ZQ, 139ZS
Cases cited: Boles v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2001) 183 ALR 239 Bulic v Commonwealth Bank of Australia Ltd [2007] FCA 307 Cottrell v Wilcox [2002] FCA 1115 Francis v Eggleston Mitchell Lawyers Pty Ltd [2014] FCAFC 18 Ghosh v Miller (No 2) [2017] FCA 890 Lahiri and Saha [2022] FedCFamC1F 271 Miller v Ghosh [2016] FCCA 2491 Re Deriu (1970) 16 FLR 420 Re Frank; ex parte Piliszky (1987) 16 FCR 396 Re Oates; ex parte Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (1987) 17 FCR 402 Re Papps; ex parte Tapp (1997) 78 FCR 524 Re Raymond; ex parte Raymond (1992) 36 FCR 424 Re Williams (1968) 13 FLR 10 Rigg v Baker [2006] FCAFC 179; [2006] 155 FCR 531 Saha and Lahiri (No 2) [2022] FedCFamC1A 181 DA Hassall, "Annulment of Bankruptcy and Review of Sequestration Orders" (1993) 67 ALJ 761
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