Mohammad Razi Khan v Arvinder Singh-Sall & Anor
[2023] EWCA Civ 1119
Gavin Paul Carter v Terri Ann Davies & Ors
20 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1536 (Ch)
High Court
A man's bankruptcy order was challenged because it was made while he had protection from creditors (a moratorium). The court decided that even though the order shouldn't have been made because of a mistake, it wasn't automatically cancelled. The judge considered the man's actions and money before deciding not to cancel the bankruptcy.
Key Facts
- •Gavin Carter (Appellant) appealed the District Judge's refusal to annul his bankruptcy order.
- •The bankruptcy petition was based on an undisputed £42,000 debt.
- •Carter obtained a moratorium under the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020 before the bankruptcy order.
- •The petitioner's solicitor failed to notify the court of the moratorium.
- •The judge considered Carter had sufficient funds to pay the debt but chose to travel to Romania and apply for a moratorium instead.
- •The judge inferred non-disclosure by Carter when applying for the moratorium.
- •The appeal challenged the judge's discretion under s.282(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act 1986.
- •The key legal question was whether the bankruptcy order was null and void due to the moratorium.
Legal Principles
Court's discretion to annul a bankruptcy order under s.282(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act 1986.
Insolvency Act 1986, s.282(1)(a)
Effect of a moratorium under the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020 on legal proceedings.
Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020, Regulations 6, 7, 10, 11
Distinction between lack of jurisdiction and failure to comply with statutory requirements in bankruptcy proceedings.
Khan v Singh-Sall [2023] EWCA Civ 1119
Effect of actions taken contrary to Regulation 7 of the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020 (null and void).
Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020, Regulation 7(12)
Test for granting permission to raise a new point on appeal.
Notting Hill Finance Ltd v Sheikh [2019] EWCA Civ 1337
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The court held that the bankruptcy order, while made in contravention of the moratorium regulations, was not null and void. The judge correctly exercised his discretion under s.282(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act 1986, considering the appellant's conduct and financial circumstances.
Similar Cases
Mohammed Kamal Ahmed v Elias Hussain & Anor
[2023] EWHC 593 (Ch)
Ramesh Philippe Dusoruth v Orca Finance UK Limited (in liquidation)
[2023] EWHC 1050 (Ch)
Malathi Latha Sriram v Commissioners for HMRC & Anor
[2024] EWHC 853 (Ch)
Marcellus Adrianus Antonius Kooter v The Official Receiver & Ors
[2023] EWHC 594 (Ch)