Gold v The Proprietors - Units Plan No 52 & Anor C8/1996 [1996] HCATrans 497 (6 December 1996)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Registry No C8 of 1996

B e t w e e n -

PATRICIA ISOBEL GOLD - A Bankrupt

Applicant

and

THE PROPRIETORS - UNITS PLAN NO 52

First Respondent

MR BARRY A. TAYLOR

TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY

Second Respondent

Application for a stay

TOOHEY J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON FRIDAY, 6 DECEMBER 1996, AT 9.32 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

TOOHEY J: Mrs Gold, you appear in person?

MRS P.I. GOLD: Yes, your Honour.

MR M.D. FLINT: I appear for the first respondent, your Honour. (instructed by Clayton Utz)

MR G.P. WALKER: I appear for the second respondent. (instructed by Hill & Rummery)

TOOHEY J: You have some application to make, Mr Walker?

MR WALKER: Yes, if your Honour pleases. I am instructed by the second respondent, your Honour, to make an application for a short adjournment to allow the second respondent to file some affidavit material in response to the application. I understand that application is consented to by all the other parties, if your Honour pleases.

TOOHEY J: Including Mrs Gold?

MR WALKER: Including Mrs Gold.

TOOHEY J: That does not present a problem, except your reference to a short adjournment, bearing in mind the time of the year. Just one moment. Dr Popple, could I just ask you about the availability of chambers hearings if this matter were adjourned beyond next week?

DR POPPLE: Beyond next week. I do not think there would be anyone available in Canberra before the end of the year.

MR WALKER: Your Honour, I should indicate the affidavit could be filed by Monday of next week.

TOOHEY J: Yes. I am simply pointing out to you that next week is the last week of the formal sittings of the Court. If the matter were not able to be listed then it might have to stand over for some time.

MR WALKER: Yes.

TOOHEY J: So long as you are quite aware of that.

MR WALKER: Yes, I understand that, your Honour.

TOOHEY J: If I do adjourn the matter, as I see no reason why I should not, I would simply adjourn it to a date to be fixed and let the parties then, particularly in your case, approach the Registrar with a view to obtaining a date when one is available. So long as you appreciate all the implications of that, Mr Walker. Thank you.

Mr Flint, I take it you are agreeable to that course?

MR FLINT: Yes.

TOOHEY J: Mrs Gold, are you happy with that proposal?

MRS GOLD: Yes. The stay will remain in place until this application is heard?

TOOHEY J: That is the form of the stay at the moment and there is no suggestion that I should do anything about the order made by Mr Justice Higgins on 26 November, which was:

Upon the appellant undertaking to proceed expeditiously with an application to a Justice of the High Court for a stay of proceedings -

you have done that -

the undertaking of the respondents not to enforce the order of 19 August 1996 until that application is heard and determined be accepted.

It is not strictly an order by way of stay made by Mr Justice Higgins; it is simply an acceptance of the undertaking that the respondents will not do anything about the order that you are seeking to challenge until your application before this Court is dealt with. So there are no problems that I can see from your point of view if the matter is adjourned.

MRS GOLD: Thank you.

TOOHEY J: Very well. I will simply order that the application be adjourned to a date to be fixed. The Court will adjourn.

AT 9.36 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED