CONTEMPT OF COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIII, Issue 142, 14 June 1912, Page 2

CONTEMPT OF COURT.

SENT TO GAOL. FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THE ACT. A sentence of three months' iron*"* ment was imposed by TSLx. JusUcc. Sim at the Supreme Court, in tie case of Bjjiest Isaac Carter, .bankrupt, against whom the Official Assignee nad a summons to show cause why he «bQuj4 not be punialxed for contempt of S<ss> Mr. Selwyn Maya appeared for ■ the Official lAsaigixea, and Mr. Haiden .represented bankrupt, who was not m attend.afcvs 4 le w h» Horjo.r'a attention to the feet set down in Ore OfSeial Assignee's affidavit, that on 29, 1911, the Assignee ihad served Uajtier vrttb notice to render U days full and true particular*, accwnts, a ß d receipts and and proof* m losses f6r fhrec y*ar 3 before the commencement of the bankruptcy. The bankrupfe ejjtirely ignored this notice, and on F*w irv 23 1912. the Assfgnee agaan wrote to the bankrupc and called upon him to comply with th.c previous notice. In tte meantime, also, he had warped to verbaliy on several occasions that he Scirry out the law. On March-13, the Wcrupt ftaaded him a statement, which did not in any way comply Sth the notice or the proof *c Bankruptcy Act Moreover, the oankrupt lad not until a very late period filed with Official Assignee a fc , «*** affairs, which is required by the Bankruptcy Act to be filed wdthm three days -EhV Assignee, had prepared a senes of statements of 4*e bankrupt's which, though tacomplete, would serve to show th*t baqkrupt <=<»W' had he wished, have given a much better count of hia afiairs than was furnished by him on March 13th last. y HiT Honor replied that the onus was o» the. bankrupt to show either that he had complied with the requirements of the law or that it was impossible for hira to do so in lull. Mr Harden, in defence, said that bankrupt had only kept a few note books and had supplied all the information he could possibly give. His Honor said that bankrupt had undoubtedly been guilty of ajfeaeh ° f the Bankruptcy Act. The Official Assignee served him with notice on February 20th. and there seemed to be no reason, whir he should not have endeavoured to comply with that notice. Arparently he took no steps -whatever, although" the Assignee had given him notice and spoken to him on several occasions, and finally gave him notice on February 23rd. On March 13th bankrupt had forwarded a very incomplete statement. The bankrupt had simply disregarded -the provisions of the \ct, and would be committed for contempt of Court. A sentenra of three months' imprisonment would be imposed.