FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Jackson, in the matter of Conway v Conway [2000] FCA 1604
IN THE MATTER OF DENISE CONWAY
ALAN JACKSON v DENISE CONWAY
N 7833 of 2000
BRANSON J
SYDNEY
31 OCTOBER 2000
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
N 7833 of 2000 |
IN THE MATTER OF DENISE CONWAY
|
BETWEEN: |
ALAN JACKSON APPLICANT
|
|
AND: |
DENISE CONWAY RESPONDENT
|
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
|
|
WHERE MADE: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The respondent pay the applicant his costs of the bankruptcy notice of 6 September 2000 to the extent that such costs were not also costs of or in respect of the bankruptcy notice of 12 September 2000.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
N 7833 of 2000 |
IN THE MATTER OF DENISE CONWAY
|
BETWEEN: |
APPLICANT
|
|
AND: |
RESPONDENT
|
|
JUDGE: |
|
|
DATE: |
|
|
PLACE: |
REASONS FOR DECISION
1 The respondent creditor caused a bankruptcy notice to be served on the applicant on 6 September 2000. On 12 September 2000 a further bankruptcy notice issued by the respondent creditor was served on the applicant. The two bankruptcy notices were founded on the same judgment debt. They differed only in the amount of interest claimed on the judgment debt. It was not until his receipt of a letter dated 25 September 2000 from the respondent creditor’s solicitors that the applicant was advised that the respondent creditor abandoned reliance on the first bankruptcy notice.
2 By that time the applicant had filed applications in the Court to set aside both of the bankruptcy notices or alternatively for an order to extend the time for compliance with them. On 10 October 2000 a Registrar ordered by consent that the first bankruptcy notice be set aside. The Registrar stood over the question of costs until 17 October 2000. The parties made submissions to me on 17 October 2000 on the question of the costs of the first bankruptcy notice.
3 The costs thrown away by the applicant by reason of the service on him of the first bankruptcy notice will be limited. The applications made to the Court with respect to that bankruptcy notice were the same applications as were made with respect to the second bankruptcy notice and the supporting documentation filed was closely similar in each case. Nonetheless, such costs as were incurred by the applicant in respect of the first notice which were not also costs of or in respect of the second bankruptcy notice should, in my view, be met by the respondent creditor. I so order.
|
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Decision herein of the Honourable Justice Branson. |
Associate:
Dated: 9 November 2000
|
Counsel for the Applicant: |
Mr C Freeman |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Applicant: |
Coode and Corry |
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Respondent: |
Mr D Knaggs |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Respondent: |
Douglas Knaggs |
|
|
|
|
Date of Hearing: |
17 October 2000 |
|
|
|
|
Date of Judgment: |
31 October 2000 |
