Viscount v Shirley [2000] JRC 255 (20 December 2000)

Viscount v Shirley [2000] JRC 255 (20 December 2000)

All legal fees incurred by the Viscount were properly incurred in the administration of the désastre, as they resulted from statutory duties and court proceedings initiated by the respondent. There are no distributable assets remaining, so further litigation on the merits of the Viscount's decisions would be futile and an abuse of process. The representation and all objections are dismissed to conclude the administration.

Citation
[2000] JRC 255
Parties
Applicant: Viscount; First Respondent: Philip William Sewallis Shirley; Creditor/claimant: F. P. Roberts & Son Limited; Creditor/claimant: Viberts
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
20 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Representation/application Under Article 31(4) of the Bankruptcy (désastre) (jersey) Law, 1990 / Post Court of Appeal Remittal, Royal Court Directions and Merits Hearing
Outcome
Application granted; representation and all objections dismissed; administration of the désastre to be concluded.
Legal Topics
Désastre Administration, Priority and Ordinary Claims, Costs in Insolvency, Properly Incurred Expenses, Court Directions
Insolvency Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Désastre Administration Priority and Ordinary Claims Costs in Insolvency Properly Incurred Expenses Court Directions

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

Parties

Viscount

Applicant

Philip William Sewallis Shirley

First Respondent

F. P. Roberts & Son Limited

Creditor/claimant

Viberts

Creditor/claimant

Procedural Posture

Representation/application Under Article 31(4) of the Bankruptcy (désastre) (jersey) Law, 1990 / Post Court of Appeal Remittal, Royal Court Directions and Merits Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether legal costs incurred by the Viscount were 'properly incurred' and chargeable to the désastre estate
  2. 2 Whether further litigation on the merits of the Viscount's decisions on claims is futile given the absence of distributable assets
  3. 3 Whether the administration of the désastre should be concluded and all objections dismissed

Ratio Decidendi

All legal fees incurred by the Viscount were properly incurred in the administration of the désastre, as they resulted from statutory duties and court proceedings initiated by the respondent. There are no distributable assets remaining, so further litigation on the merits of the Viscount's decisions would be futile and an abuse of process. The representation and all objections are dismissed to conclude the administration.

Court Disposition

Application granted; representation and all objections dismissed; administration of the désastre to be concluded.

Orders

  • The representation made pursuant to Article 31(4) of the Bankruptcy (Désastre) (Jersey) Law, 1990, and all the first respondent's objections in relation thereto, are dismissed.
  • The administration of the désastre is to be concluded.