header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
13 June 2014 / Robert Jordan
Issue: 7610 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

In suspense

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
web_pp_bankruptcy_jordan

Robert Jordan considers applications to suspend discharge of a bankruptcy order

Over the last five years the number of applications to suspend automatic discharge has reduced from 1,970 in 2008/9 to 1,218 in 2012/3. The suspension of automatic discharge is penal to ensure cooperation during the investigation phase.

IA 1986

An application to suspend the discharge of a bankruptcy order is made under s 279 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). This prevents the automatic discharge and the end of one year “beginning with the date on which the bankruptcy commences”. Any application must be commenced before the automatic discharge as the application is to suspend that discharge.

The application can be made by either the official receiver or trustee (s 279(3)) and the court may order that the automatic discharge shall cease to run until: “(a) the end of a specified period, or (b) the fulfillment of a specified condition.”

The court may make an order (s 279(4)) only “if satisfied that the bankrupt has failed or is failing to comply with

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll