Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Custsoms v De Freitas [2022] EWHC 1946 (Ch) (04 August 2022)

Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Custsoms v De Freitas [2022] EWHC 1946 (Ch) (04 August 2022)

The petition was not dismissed on any of the four grounds advanced by the debtor. The court found that the complaint process was not ongoing in a way that justified dismissal, the debtor's ability to pay did not warrant dismissal but justified an adjournment, factual errors in the petition were corrected and caused no prejudice, and HMRC had complied with its public sector equality duty and duty to make reasonable adjustments. However, the court granted a 90-day adjournment to allow the debtor to pay the petition debt via equity release, as there was a reasonable prospect of payment within that period.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1946 (Ch)
Parties
Petitioner: The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs; Debtor: David Gerald Vivian Fitzwilliam de Freitas
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petition / Final Hearing With Judgment on Adjournment
Outcome
Petition adjourned for 90 days to allow debtor to pay the petition debt; no dismissal of the petition.
Legal Topics
Bankruptcy Petition, Public Sector Equality Duty, Reasonable Adjustments, Mental Health and Insolvency, Statutory Demand, Adjournment of Proceedings
Insolvency Disability Law Public Law Bankruptcy Petition Public Sector Equality Duty Reasonable Adjustments Mental Health and Insolvency Statutory Demand +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Petitioner

David Gerald Vivian Fitzwilliam de Freitas

Debtor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petition / Final Hearing With Judgment on Adjournment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the bankruptcy petition should be dismissed or adjourned due to ongoing complaint/ADR, debtor's ability to pay, factual errors in the petition, or breaches of the Equality Act 2010 (public sector equality duty and reasonable adjustments)

Ratio Decidendi

The petition was not dismissed on any of the four grounds advanced by the debtor. The court found that the complaint process was not ongoing in a way that justified dismissal, the debtor's ability to pay did not warrant dismissal but justified an adjournment, factual errors in the petition were corrected and caused no prejudice, and HMRC had complied with its public sector equality duty and duty to make reasonable adjustments. However, the court granted a 90-day adjournment to allow the debtor to pay the petition debt via equity release, as there was a reasonable prospect of payment within that period.

Court Disposition

Petition adjourned for 90 days to allow debtor to pay the petition debt; no dismissal of the petition.

Orders

  • Petition adjourned to first available date after 90 days from judgment.
  • HMRC to re-verify and re-serve the amended petition before the next hearing.