ORDER REFUSED.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVI, Issue 261, 2 October 1936, Page 5

ORDER REFUSED.

JUDGE’S RESERVED DECISION

A judgment of interest was delivered on behalf of Mr Justice Blair, yesterday, in which His Honour declined to declare bankrupt a debtor against whom an order for the payment of a debt had been obtained by his father. The action originated when David Prouse, farmer, of Longburn, obtained judgment for £l3B JBs in the Magistrate’s Court at Palmerston North against his son, Oliver Prouse, farmer, of Longburn. The matter has been twice before the Courts —once before the Magistrate’s Court, when the Magistrate gave judgment in favour of the debtor, and again before the Supreme Court on appeal, when Mr Justice Ostler said that, though he regretted it, the law was such that judgment would he given against the debtor, and the matter was returned to the Magistrate’s Court to have judgment accordingly entered. David Prouse then petitioned to have Oliver Prouse made a bankrunt, and the matter came before the sittings of the Supreme Court at Palmerston North on July 3, when debtor (represented by Mr A. M. Ongley) opposed the petition. Notice of objection not having been filed under Rule 105 of the Bankruptcy Rules, the Registrar adjourned the matter to the next sittings of the Supreme Court to enable this to be done. The Registrar had considered there might be some merit in the debtor’s objection to the adjudication. The matter came before Mr Jus tice Blair at the last sittings here, Mr H. R. Cooper appearing in favour of the petition and Mr Ongley opposing it. After considerable legal argument His Honour reserved his decision, which was delivered by the Registrar in the absence of tho Judge yesterday as follows: “1 am by no means satisfied that tho judgment creditor in seeking an order for adjudication against his son is acting bona fide. I am quite unable to appreciate what benefit the petitioning creditor hopes to obtain. I can see none. I have verified the fact that the judgment given by Mr Justice Ostler on appeal from the Magistrate’s judgment in favour of the debtor was based on a teehiiTcality and the merits of the petitioning creditor’s claim are all with the debtor. The authorities quoted to me by Mr Ongley show that in a case circumstanced as this is the Court may look behind the debt. The petition is dismissed.”

In the publication of the judgment yesterday, the transposition of the Christian names of the parties incorrectly made Oliver Prouse appear as the petitioner and David Prouse as defendant.