The High Court has allowed the Official Assignee in Sean Dunne’s bankruptcy to inspect family law documents found at a property in Straffan, Co Kildare, and records held in related family law proceedings.
In a judgment delivered on 13 August 2014, Mr Justice Brian J. McGovern refused relief sought by Dunne in a motion dated 3 December 2013. The motion included a request for the return of family law documents seized at the property identified in the judgment as the “K Club property”.
The Official Assignee said inspection was needed to establish Dunne’s financial position and identify any assets that might have been concealed from the bankruptcy process. Dunne argued that the family law papers were outside the statutory category of books or papers relating to his estate. He also challenged the seizure as unlawful, arguing that the warrant authorised removal of property but did not refer to documents, and said the Official Assignee’s privacy rights arguments should not justify access.
The judge held that section 19 of the Bankruptcy Act 1988 required the bankrupt to provide books and other papers relating to his estate, and that this included family law documents found at the property. He rejected the argument that “property” under the Act was limited to items with monetary value.
The court also rejected Dunne’s privacy objection. It found the Official Assignee’s actions were neither arbitrary nor disproportionate in the circumstances and were necessary to investigate the bankrupt’s financial affairs. The Official Assignee was a party to the family law proceedings and therefore subject to the in camera rule, the judge said.
For papers seized at the property, the Official Assignee proposed to review them for relevance to the bankruptcy estate and return those found irrelevant. The judge considered that approach reasonable and lawful, and refused the requested return of the documents.
Separately, on the Official Assignee’s motion in the family law proceedings, the court ordered that he could examine all documentation in those proceedings, inspect family law documents held by Clerkin Lynch Solicitors, and take copies of documents he considered relevant to carrying out his bankruptcy duties. The judgment did not authorise unrestricted use of the papers: the stated purpose was to identify information relevant to those duties, and the in camera rule continued to apply.