Bond in asset probe costs row
Bankrupt businessman Craig Bond has been accused of failing to comply with a series of court orders relating to a probe into his links to family trusts and companies.
Lawyers for Mr Bond's former partner Dianne Beaman said he had failed to hand over $100,000 to help pay for a court-ordered asset probe and had then appointed a bankruptcy trustee without providing her any prior notice.
The allegations were made on Wednesday in the State court's arm of a multi-jurisdictional legal battle over the financial affairs of Mr Bond, who threw himself into bankruptcy on June 5. Lawyer Peter Hannan said the lack of notice given by Mr Bond about his plans to go into full-blow bankruptcy had denied his client the chance to get an injunction preventing the appointment.
Seeking an injunction preventing trustee Daniel Juratowich from distributing cash to creditors, Mr Hannah said the appointment could result in the majority of Mr Bond's assets going back to family trust companies.
Ms Beaman has separately asked for Federal orders overturning the June 5 appointment and is seeking State orders that she have access to $100,000 for her court-ordered probe.
At stake in the battle is about $3.8 million in proceeds from the former London home of Mr Bond's father Alan, who was bankrupted in 1992 with personal debts of $600 million. Craig Bond's $5.5 million list of creditors is dominated by Bond family companies, including $2.85 million allegedly owed to a company directed by his brother John and which owns Alan Bond's current Cottesloe home.
Ms Beaman plans to use State legal powers to examine Craig Bond's links to trusts and com- panies that own, or have owned, assets around the world.
In legal argument yesterday, Mr Juratowich's lawyer David Skender argued the Bankruptcy Act prevented the State court making orders covering a bankrupt's property.
Mr Skender said the trustee was unlikely to be able to get the $100,000 back from Ms Beaman if her lawyers were allowed to use it to cover expenses. It was obvious that Mr Bond had not complied with court orders but the State court could not make follow-up orders after the bankruptcy appointment. "The conduct that is complained of is the conduct of the bankrupt, not the trustee," he said.
The barrister opposed the injunction preventing the trustee distributing money to creditors, saying Ms Beaman would receive notice of any planned distributions. Based on these assurances, Ms Beaman's legal team withdrew that part of their claim.
The row about the $100,000 has been put on hold pending Ms Beaman's application to overturn the bankruptcy.
Federal judge Toni Lucev is due to hold a directions hearing on July 14.
