To avoid an asset reverting to a bankrupt after the end of his period of bankruptcy, the asset must be realised. An assignment of a beneficial interest for a future price does not amount to a realisation.

The claimant appealed against a decision that her former husband’s one third interest in the matrimonial home vested in his trustee in bankruptcy (the first defendant) free from any rights asserted by her, so permitting an order for possession and sale of the property. The claimant argued that pursuant to a matrimonial consent order made prior to the bankruptcy, she had a right of exclusive occupation of the property until remarriage, cohabitation or death.

This month we review the court's view on open ended suspension of discharge from bankruptcy and the difficulty of 'substituting' a defendant in proceedings where the relevant limitation period has expired:

Suspension of discharge from bankruptcy should not be open ended

The High Court has held that only in the most serious cases of non-co-operation should a discharge from bankruptcy be suspended otherwise than on a specified period or condition basis.

The court has held that a statutory demand is valid despite the high default interest rate on an underlying loan.

The courts have the power to and increasingly will make a civil restraint order where an individual persistently issues claims that are totally without merit.

Gowling WLG's finance litigation experts bring you the latest on the cases and issues affecting the lending industry.

Uncrystallised pension pot remains protected following bankruptcy

Knowing how much money you owe and are owed is critical when considering disputes with other parties. You need to consider whether a right of set-off exists between you and the other party.

Where the entirety of a debt is not included in an agreement to settle, a creditor can continue to prove in a bankruptcy for the balance.

36979  Darin Andrew Randle v. Her Majesty the Queen

(B.C.)

Criminal law – Evidence – “Mr. Big” confessions

Lenders should be aware that a broad definition of “wages” owing to employees of a borrower/customer in bankruptcy or receivership can take priority over what a lender might otherwise believe is its “first ranking charge” against the borrower.