On 29 January 2016, the Irish bankruptcy term was reduced from 3 years to 1 year. This Briefing sets out further detail, and summarises recent developments in the area of bankruptcy and personal insolvency.

BACKGROUND:

The Court of Appeal found that voluntary transfers of property from a husband to his wife were fraudulent even though his creditor only became a creditor eleven years after the transfers.

Details of the case:

A recent decision of the Court of Appeal has seemingly halted a trend towards leniency in the High Court in applications for the restriction and disqualification of directors of insolvent companies, particularly where the company has been struck off the register of companies for failing to file annual returns.

Facts 

In Farrell & Kelly v Petrosyan & Ors (linked to McLoughlin & anor v ACC Loan Management Ltd), High Court, O'Connor J, 2 March 2016 the High Court considered an application for possession on behalf of receivers appointed by ACC Loan Management Limited (ACC).  One of the issues before the court was whether the receivers had authority to act in the proceedings in view of their deeds of appointment by ACC. 

At this stage of Ireland's economic cycle, in many cases obtaining a court judgment against a debtor does not necessarily ensure payment. If the judgment debtor fails to pay, there are several procedures available to a judgment creditor to attach the judgment debtor's assets and income so as to obtain payment (a process broadly termed 'execution'). In order to make such an application, the judgment creditor must of course have some knowledge of and information about the particular asset or income.

In a recent High Court decision, the validity of the appointment of joint receivers by ACC Loan Management Limited by deed under seal was upheld, and an order for possession in favour of those receivers was made.

Law Society of Ireland v Motor Insurers’ Bureau of Ireland [04.09.15]

In McCann -v- Halpin & anor [2016] IESC 11, the receiver applied to the High Court for directions pursuant to Section 316(1) of the Companies Act 1963, in relation to the exercise of his powers as receiver over the property and assets of Elektron and Crossplan (the Companies). The appeal before the Supreme Court dealt with one issue - whether the receiver was validly appointed.

Facts 

Facts