Bankruptcy – Provable debt - Appellants acted in breach of s 995(2) Corporations Law (Q) by engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct in securities dealings - Respondent thereby induced to enter contractual relations with a third party - Whether respondent's claim for unliquidated damages under s 1005 Corporations Law (Q) arose otherwise than by reason of a contract, promise or breach of trust - Whether, pursuant to s 82(2) Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), the respondent's claim for unliquidated damages constituted a debt provable in the bankruptcy of appellants.
Words and phrases – "demand in the nature of unliquidated damages", "provable debt", "set-off", "contract, promise or breach of trust".
Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – ss 82(2), 86(1).
Corporations Law (Q) – ss 995(2), 1005.
Judgment date
Case number
B68/2004
Before
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Catchwords