The case of the Vexatious litigant in the Federal Court decision of National Australia Bank Ltd v Garrett  FCA 714 in which the Court stepped in to invalidate and restrain an improper registration on the PPSR.
An undischarged bankrupt, and serial vexatious litigant, registered a financing statement on the Personal Property Securities Register (PPSR) claiming a security interest over all the property of the Bank. The security interest was said to arise from a charge granted by the Bank to secure an undertaking as to damages provided by the Bank in an earlier proceeding, even though the Bank was never required to provide security in support of that undertaking.
The Bank served an amendment demand on the bankrupt requiring him to submit a financing change statement to remove the registration of the security interest from the PPSR. The bankrupt refused and, instead, purported to appoint himself as the managing controller of the Bank in respect of all of its property the subject of the purported security interest.
The Bank brought an application seeking orders, amongst other things:
The bankrupt attempted to file, and in some cases did file, a “plethora” of what he described as “interlocutory applications”, affidavits and submissions running to thousands of pages.
In making the orders sought by the Bank, Beach J held that apart from the fact that the bankrupt had no standing to pursue any claims in relation to the purported security interest (as any right, if any, had vested in his trustee in bankruptcy):
This decision represents one of only a handful of occasions where the Court has been asked to resolve a dispute as to the validity of a PPSR registration. Even though the facts of the case are at the extreme end of the spectrum, the decision demonstrates the Court’s willingness to step in and prevent abuses of the registration process.
Source : Corrs
You must log in to post a comment.