Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Latest articles
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
View all articles

BANKRUPTCY: Williams v Bateman [2009] EWHC 1760 (Ch)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:06 PM
Slug : williams-v-bateman-2009-ewhc-1760-ch
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 4, 2009, 06:06 AM
Article ID : 85895

(Chancery Division; David Richards J; 22 July 2009)

The husband and the wife held the matrimonial home as joint tenants. When the parties were divorced the joint tenancy was severed by notice. In the same year a bankruptcy order was made against the husband. About 15 years later, following a rise in the value of the matrimonial home, the trustee in bankruptcy applied for a declaration in respect of the interests in the property, and for an order for sale. The judge made a declaration that the trustee had a 50% beneficial interest, with an order for sale. The judge made certain deductions in the wife's favour, including £37,245.50 by way of equity of exoneration and £11,250 representing the value of improvement works to the property. The wife appealed, arguing that the equity of exoneration figure should have been treated as a set-off against the trustee's interest in property, under Insolvency Act 1986, s 323(1).

The appeal was dismissed. It was fundamental to the operation of set-off under s 323 of the 1986 Act that there be liabilities each way between the bankrupt and the other person as at the date of bankruptcy. While there had been a contingent liability of the bankrupt husband to the wife as at the date of bankruptcy, there had been no liability due from her to the bankrupt husband. Therefore, applying s 323, the notion of setting-off the contingent liability to her against the husband's beneficial interest in the property had no place.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from