SO Holding v CDS 3 [2011] JLR 782 (29 September 2011)

SO Holding v CDS 3 [2011] JLR 782 (29 September 2011)

If the court is satisfied that the debtor is insolvent and the creditor has a valid, liquidated claim, it has discretion to grant a desastre order, which is normally made unless specific facts justify refusal; being the only known creditor does not restrict the order unless injustice would result.

Citation
[2011] JLR 782
Parties
Applicant: SO Holding; Respondent: CDS 3
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
29 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application / Application for Desastre Order
Outcome
desastre order granted
Legal Topics
Desastre Order, Court Discretion, Creditor Claim Validity
Insolvency Bankruptcy Desastre Order Court Discretion Creditor Claim Validity

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SO Holding

Applicant

CDS 3

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Application / Application for Desastre Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant a desastre order under Bankruptcy (Desastre) (Jersey) Law 1990, art. 6(1)
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is the only known creditor and if that affects the granting of the order

Ratio Decidendi

If the court is satisfied that the debtor is insolvent and the creditor has a valid, liquidated claim, it has discretion to grant a desastre order, which is normally made unless specific facts justify refusal; being the only known creditor does not restrict the order unless injustice would result.

Court Disposition

desastre order granted

Orders

  • Desastre order made under Bankruptcy (Desastre) (Jersey) Law 1990, art. 6(1)
  • Creditor may be ordered to indemnify Viscount under art. 5(2)