Part two: Shantanu Majumdar continues to unravel the complexities of bankruptcy annulment
A detailed summary of the complex and sometimes colourful facts of Paulin v Paulin [2009] 3 All ER 88, [2009] All ER (D) 187 (Mar) appeared in the first instalment of this article (see NLJ, 17 July 2009, p 1015).
In essence, a husband was the respondent to an application for ancillary relief by his wife and sought, by various dishonest stratagems, to disguise his assets and prevent their redistribution by the matrimonial court. The main asset was the (£1m+) proceeds of the sale of a house which had been owned by a company (Cativo Limited) put into liquidation on the basis of a sham debt designed to make it appear to be insolvent.
The husband had also been made bankrupt on his own petition. By s 272 Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) the only ground upon which a debtor’s petition may be presented is that he is unable to pay his debts. Section 282 provides that: “(1) The court may
-sophie-hughes-(r).tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=7a9dca4b_1)
