Housing and Bankruptcy

Mr Muir Hunter said at the start that in order to reconcile the harder line approach of judges, who put creditors first, and the Family Division, who sought to protect the family on the expense of creditors, a policy decision must be made. Mr Hunter observed that in bankruptcy, something must be done for the family. Otherwise, they will be a burden on public funds. Some protection of the family home is favourable.

The Committee weight up different arguments and opinions on the question of whether the wife was a joint owner of property, or whether it is solely owned by the husband if he is the sole legal owner. The committee draw the discussion to a close by suggesting that a guideline be produced to direct the courts as to how they should use their discretion when it came to the family home.

Disability of Bankrupts 

It was agreed that full bankruptcy must be preserved for serious cases. It was finally agreed in this meeting that bankrupts should not obtain any credit for goods and services, or a loan of any amount, without disclosure. The possibility of a bankrupt escaping abroad justified putting a restriction on his movement, and that a bankrupt should not be able to keep a passport without leave of the Court.

Discharge of the Bankrupt

There was a general agreement that the period of a bankruptcy case should be five years. The review should start as a private affair, but could be transferred into the public domain if it was in the interest of the public, and in the bankrupt’s interest. It was agreed that upon conclusion of a public examination, bankrupts should be able to apply for a discharge, and that the courts should be able to grant an immediate discharge.

Meeting32 - 10th July 1979