Whig v Whig

Whig v Whig

The wife failed to prove that the husband was able to pay his debts as they fell due on 20 October 2003. The evidence showed the husband had no income, significant pressing debts, and no realistic prospect of paying them without selling the matrimonial home, which the wife would not have agreed to. There was no evidence of undisclosed assets. The bankruptcy order was properly made and could not be annulled.

Parties
Applicant/petitioner/wife: Renu Whig; Respondent/husband/bankrupt: Manohar Whig; Respondent: The Official Receiver; Respondent/trustee in Bankruptcy: D J Cheverton (Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Estate of Manohar Whig)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Ancillary Relief and Bankruptcy Proceedings / Final Judgment After Consolidated Hearing of Ancillary Relief and Application to Annul Bankruptcy
Outcome
Application to annul bankruptcy dismissed; ancillary relief orders made in light of bankruptcy remaining in force.
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Bankruptcy Annulment, Division of Matrimonial Assets, Pension Sharing, Nominal Maintenance, Creditor Interests
Family Law Insolvency Law Ancillary Relief Bankruptcy Annulment Division of Matrimonial Assets Pension Sharing Nominal Maintenance Creditor Interests

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 23
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Renu Whig

Applicant/petitioner/wife

Manohar Whig

Respondent/husband/bankrupt

The Official Receiver

Respondent

D J Cheverton (Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Estate of Manohar Whig)

Respondent/trustee in Bankruptcy

Procedural Posture

Ancillary Relief and Bankruptcy Proceedings / Final Judgment After Consolidated Hearing of Ancillary Relief and Application to Annul Bankruptcy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the husband's bankruptcy order should be annulled under section 282(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act 1986
  2. 2 Whether the husband was able to pay his debts as they fell due on 20 October 2003
  3. 3 Whether there were undisclosed assets

Ratio Decidendi

The wife failed to prove that the husband was able to pay his debts as they fell due on 20 October 2003. The evidence showed the husband had no income, significant pressing debts, and no realistic prospect of paying them without selling the matrimonial home, which the wife would not have agreed to. There was no evidence of undisclosed assets. The bankruptcy order was properly made and could not be annulled.

Court Disposition

Application to annul bankruptcy dismissed; ancillary relief orders made in light of bankruptcy remaining in force.

Orders

  • Wife's application to annul bankruptcy dismissed.
  • Wife retains her interest in the matrimonial home, endowment policy, jewellery, and car.