Aitken v. Robson [1914] ScotLR 184 (06 January 1914)

Aitken v. Robson [1914] ScotLR 184 (06 January 1914)

The Court exercised its nobile officium to grant discharge to the petitioner because statutory procedures for discharge were unavailable due to the creditors' failure to confirm a trustee and proceed with sequestration, and it would be inequitable and futile to require the petitioner to incur further expense or remit the matter for inquiry. The prayer for reinvestment in the estates was refused.

Citation
[1914] ScotLR 184
Parties
Petitioner: Thomas Aitken; Respondent: William Robson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 January 1914
Procedural Posture
Petition (bankruptcy/sequestration) / Judgment on Petition for Discharge and Reinvestment
Outcome
petition granted in part; petitioner discharged; reinvestment refused
Legal Topics
Sequestration, Discharge of Bankrupt, Nobile Officium, Trustee Confirmation, Creditor Inaction
Bankruptcy Insolvency Law Sequestration Discharge of Bankrupt Nobile Officium Trustee Confirmation Creditor Inaction

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Aitken

Petitioner

William Robson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition (bankruptcy/sequestration) / Judgment on Petition for Discharge and Reinvestment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should exercise its nobile officium to discharge a bankrupt where statutory procedures are unavailable due to creditor inaction and lack of trustee confirmation.
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner is entitled to reinvestment in his estates.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court exercised its nobile officium to grant discharge to the petitioner because statutory procedures for discharge were unavailable due to the creditors' failure to confirm a trustee and proceed with sequestration, and it would be inequitable and futile to require the petitioner to incur further expense or remit the matter for inquiry. The prayer for reinvestment in the estates was refused.

Court Disposition

petition granted in part; petitioner discharged; reinvestment refused

Orders

  • Petitioner discharged of all debts and obligations contracted or for which he was liable at the date of sequestration.
  • Petition otherwise dismissed.