BANKRUPT’S CHILD

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 July 1932, Page 8

BANKRUPT’S CHILD

MAINTENANCE SETTLEMENT [PEE press association.] WELLINGTON, July 27. An application under the Bankruptcy Act concerning John Moug, bankrupt of Wellington, was heard by Mr. Jus tice MacGregor, at the Supreme Court to-day.

The Official Assignee sought to have declared void, as against him, a deed of settlement dated March 1, 1931, and authority in writing, dated September 18, 1931, given by Moug for the maintenance of his child, Neta June Moug, and involving the sums of £750 and £lOO respectively; and asked that the trustees, David Wilson Vertue and Reginald Hardie Boys, be ordered to make available the £B5O, or'sufficient to pay the creditors 20/- in the pound. The grounds of the application were that Moug was adjudged bankrupt on Jan uary 29, 1932, and that two documents and the payment of the money were a settlement of property void as against the Officii Assignee tinder the Bankruptcy Act. Counsel for Mrs T. Moug, said the trustees of settlement would simply abide by the order of the Court. It had been conceded that there had been good faith on the part of Mrs Moug and the trustees.

His Honor: What do you say the real consideration was?

Counsel submitted that Mrs Moug had given a valuable consideration by abandoning all maintenance proceedings in favour of the child, cancelling an existing maintenance order, and for not taking out a charging order against a hank deposit under the Destitute Persons’ Act. An order could be made against a person who could be shown not to have adequately supported anyone for -whose support he was responsible, but, to the extent that the deed provided the child with adequate maintenance, there could be no claim by the wife under the Act, after the deed commenced to operate. His Honor said he would reserve his decision.