This week’s TGIF considers the Federal Court decision of National Australia Bank Ltd v Garrett [2016] FCA 714 in which the Court stepped in to invalidate and restrain an improper registration on the PPSR
BACKGROUND
1117387 Ontario Inc., by court order in October 2003, was placed under receivership for defaulting on payment of a mortgage. In October 2008, the Court was asked to approve the receiver’s third report and the proposed sale of the mortgaged lands. A complicating factor was that the mortgaged lands were subject to environmental contamination as a result of a neighbouring oil and gas facility.
The long-discussed amendments to the Czech Insolvency Act entered into force on 1 July 2017.
These aim primarily to strengthen the transparency of insolvency proceedings; reduce paperwork in the insolvency courts; and change the system of allocation of insolvency cases in the area of debt relief.
The following highlights the most fundamental changes introduced last month.
Allocating insolvency cases
One very serious problem associated with insolvency proceedings in the Czech Republic is submitting ‘vexatious’ insolvency petitions. In general, insolvency petitions are considered to be vexatious if they, in fact, pursue a goal other than that of resolving the debtor’s insolvency. Such petitions are often filed against financially sound entities in order to harm them in the eyes of their business partners and customers.
In SPV Optimal Osus Limited -v- HSBC Institutional Trust Services (Ireland) Limited & Ors the Court of Appeal rejected an appeal of a High Court decision dismissing proceedings as being frivolous and vexatious and bound to fail on the basis that the proceedings against the defendants were contrary to public policy, void and unenforceable as a matter of law since the assignment of the right to litigate third party claims amou
The courts have the power to and increasingly will make a civil restraint order where an individual persistently issues claims that are totally without merit.
The bankrupt’s trustee applied for a possession order of his home. The bankrupt unsuccessfully appealed his bankruptcy, the order in litigation that had led to his bankruptcy and the possession order, but he refused throughout to give up possession and applied for a committal order. The court found the bankrupt in contempt of court for failing to give possession and sentenced him to six months’ imprisonment.
The courts have the power to and increasingly will make a civil restraint order where an individual persistently issues claims that are totally without merit.
The bankrupt’s trustee applied for a possession order of his home. The bankrupt unsuccessfully appealed his bankruptcy, the order in litigation that had led to his bankruptcy and the possession order, but he refused throughout to give up possession and applied for a committal order. The court found the bankrupt in contempt of court for failing to give possession and sentenced him to six months’ imprisonment.