ABUSE OF THE COURT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7852, 14 July 1911, Page 1

ABUSE OF THE COURT

BANKRUPTCY ANNULLED ATTEMPT TO HAVE MAINTENANCE ‘REDUCED. The Chief Justice delivered his reserved judgment yesterday morning on the petition of Margaret Aekins to have annulled the bankruptcy of Robert. James Aekins, her husband, on the ground that his action in filing a petition in bankruptcy was an abuse of the process of the court. "This is a novel application,” said his Honor. ‘Tn fact so far as I know a similar application has never before been made to the Supreme Court of New Zealand. Tho application is made by the wife of tho debtor to annul the order of adjudication of the debtor. It appears thait the debtor and his wife separated, and by a deed ho agreed to pay her .£2 10s a week, she to maintain herself and his children. After tho agreement was made his salary was not large and she agreed to take only £2 a week. His salary now has increased so that, according to his own admission, ho is in receipt of X 6 8s 4d a week for salary. Ha now refuses to pay .£2 10s a week, and has not paid that sum for some monrns. Ho says that this is too largo an amount to pay because some of tho children have grown up, but according to the wife’s evidence she has had to maintain herself and tho family by sewing, and ait ouo time by keeping boarders, but her health docs not permit her to keep boarders now. It is practically not denied that the whole object of his bankruptcy is to get the amount in his agreement for tho maintenance of his wife reduced. In my opinion, it is only necessary to state this to show that his conduct is an abuse ot tho Bankruptcy Act, and the only question is whether there is power in this court to annul the bankruptcy proceedings initiated by himself." Alter discussing this point by reference to the authorities cited his Honor said:

“Tneso cases all - recognised that there is power to set. aside a bankruptcy if tho bankruptcy is an abuse ot tho process of the court. In my opinion, there could not be a clearer abuse of the court than in this case. I may add that the debtor has not paid any maintenance money for two months, and he has been in receipt of, according to his own admission, XG Gs 4d a week, and yet according to his account of assets in’ hand he lias only A 3. Ho has, therefore, deliberately wasted his money or. else ho has piljt. it somewhere ix ‘'dj'tf keeping. The; bankruptcy must b» annulled, with costs Xo - ss ; to bo. paid by the debtor."