header-logo header-logo

Insolvency

24 May 2013
Issue: 7561 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Darbyshire v Turpin and another [2013] EWHC 954 (Ch), [2013] All ER (D) 161 (May)

The respondents served a statutory demand on the appellant. The appellant’s application to set aside the statutory demand was dismissed (the order). The order failed to specify a date on or after which the respondents could present a petition for a bankruptcy order to be made against the appellant. The respondents presented their petition the following day. A district judge adjudged the appellant to be bankrupt upon the petition presented by the respondents. The appellant appealed against the judge’s bankruptcy order.

The appellant submitted among other things that there had been an absence of any order by the judge under r 6.5(6) of the Insolvency Rules 1986 in that the order failed to specify a date on or after which the respondents could present a petition, and that, once an application was made to set aside a statutory demand, the creditor could not then present a petition. Second, that the district judge had been wrong to proceed to a substantive determination of the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll