The Court held that bankrupt plaintiffs lacked standing under s 58(1) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) to apply for enforcement of orders made in their favour prior to bankruptcy, as the chose in action constituted by the right to enforce those orders vested in the trustee in bankruptcy. However, the Court held it could, on its own motion, direct the defendants to comply with the pre-bankruptcy mandatory order (to consent to transfer of a lease), because enforcement of such an order did not confer a proprietary or monetary benefit on the bankrupts and did not involve any election to prosecute or discontinue under s 60(2). The benefit of the costs order made at the original hearing vested in the trustee in bankruptcy as part of the bankrupt estates.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.