The Court of Appeal has refused an appeal by a discharged bankrupt against an order allowing the sale of her former family home in Ballinagore, Co Westmeath, for the benefit of creditors. It upheld the High Court’s decision to postpone the sale for six months, but said the parties should be heard on when vacant possession must be handed to the Official Assignee.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Costello on 23 January 2020, concerned Ballinagore House, which the court said was jointly owned by Anne Daly and her husband, Patrick J. Daly. Both had been adjudicated bankrupt, and their interests in the property had vested in the Official Assignee. Mr Daly remained bankrupt; Ms Daly had been discharged by operation of law.
The Official Assignee applied under section 61 of the Bankruptcy Act 1988 for court approval to sell the property. The High Court sanctioned the sale on 28 January 2019, ordered the couple to give vacant possession and postponed the sale for six months. Ms Daly appealed, arguing that the High Court should have adjourned the hearing so she could seek legal aid, and that the sale order was disproportionate.
The Court of Appeal found no basis to overturn the refusal of an adjournment. Ms Daly had been represented by a solicitor from October 2018 until shortly before the hearing, when she discharged him. She applied for legal aid on the same day, but there was no information about when the application would be decided or how long an adjournment would be needed. The court said the creditors had already waited a long time for the asset to be realised.
Ms Daly also sought to challenge the 2012 consent judgment that led to her bankruptcy. The Court of Appeal noted that her earlier application to extend the time to appeal that judgment had been refused. It said she could not defend the sale application by arguing that she should never have been adjudicated bankrupt.
In considering the postponement, the court said the relevant factors were the creditors’ interests and all the circumstances of the case. Neither spouse was a non-bankrupt spouse, and no dependants lived at the house. The High Court had taken Ms Daly’s apparent disability into account, although there was no evidence of it before the court. The Court of Appeal saw no basis to interfere with the six-month postponement.
The appeal was not allowed. The judgment did not set a new date for vacant possession: it directed that submissions be heard on that date because Ms Daly remained at the property and the existing date had passed.