Categories:Other

Ferris will herald a new era

  • Print
  • Comments (1)

Readers' comments (1)

  • I am indeed concerned that Mr. Justice Ferris during an appeal by a banrupt who could not attend due to illness, ignored the basic principal that personal service must be occasioned upon the defendant to an application.
    Not only was the Defendant Bankrupt not in England when he was supposedly personally served by a service agent for the applicant and swore a statement claiming he had personally served the defendant bankrupt with the notice of hearing. This was impossible as the defendant Bankrupt was in Scotland at the time of the alledged personal service.
    Further there was a complete offset against the Applicants claim as evidenced by the insurance company paying out the claim to the appointed trustee. In fact the Applicant had been negligent in notifying the Insurers of the claims under the policy as required by the policy. The Applicant was to make the claims to the INsurance company and not the insured. Mr. Justice Ferris clearly made the simple mistake of thinking that the Insured was to make the claim to the insurance company and there was no duty on the Applicant to make the claims to the INsurance company. However, the INsurance company confirmed that the Applicant certainly did have the duty to make the claims and was required under the policy to do so.
    It should also be noted that Mr. Justice Ferris, failed to heed the comments of the original District Judge in the Bankruptcy matter. The Bankrupt Appellant went before the original County Court Judge who made the Order of Bankruptcy and presented the evidence to the Judge proving beyond any doubt that the service agent could not have served him at all. The District Judge commented " If I had known this at the time, I could not and would not have made the Order of Bankruptcy" and further commented that " As the matter is with the RCJ you must advise the RCJ of these facts." Clearly Mr. Justice Ferris totally ignored these facts and indeed the original Applicant owes the Bankrupt Appellant money. What a travesty of Justice.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (1)