In re Booth (No. 2) [2016] 1 JLR_Note 20 (19 April 2016)
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Bankruptcy / Assignment of Claims
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that claims in a bankruptcy (desastre) may be assigned.
Court disposition
claims may be assigned
02
Material facts
Parties
Booth
Debtor03
Procedural history
Posture
Bankruptcy / Assignment of Claims
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether claims in a bankruptcy (desastre) may be assigned
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Jersey bankruptcy law
Claims in a bankruptcy (desastre) may be assigned.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that claims in a bankruptcy (desastre) may be assigned.
Court disposition
claims may be assigned
Source and reliance status
Official court record
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court record
Judgment
[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [
DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:
BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> In re Booth (No. 2) [2016] 1 JLR_Note 20 (19 April 2016) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2016/JLR16N120.html Cite as: [2016] 1 JLR_Note 20 [ New search ] [ Help ] In re Booth (No. 2) 2016 (1) JLR Note 20 (19 April 2016) Bankruptcy- desastre -assignment of claims The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 2016 (1) JLR Note 20 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2016/JLR16N120.html
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.