self upon the hearing of a petition by the judg Although upon a petition by a judgment ruptcy petition by a cr Signature of Petition power of attorney autho his behalf by his duly alia) "to commence and at law or in equity, all proceedings touching an ships or other personal es concerned" :-Held, tha the attorney to sign on a bankruptcy petition a The Court of Bankruptcy has power to go behind a judgment at the instance of the debtor, upon the hearing of a petition presented by the judgment creditor for a receiving order; but the court will not do so on the mere suggestion by the debtor that the judgment debt is bad, if it considers that the objections raised are frivolous. Beyfus, Ex parte, or Saville, Ex parte, Saville, In re, 35 W. R. 791; 4 M. B. R. 277-principal. Richards, Ea C. A. A judgment debtor having been served with a bankruptcy notice, without alleging fraud or that there had been a miscarriage of justice at the trial, proposed to give evidence before the registrar to show that the issues in the action, which had been tried before a judge and jury, had been wrongly decided:-Held, that the registrar rightly refused to admit such evidence. Scotch Whiskey Distillers, Ex parte, Flatau, In re, 22 Q. B. D. 83; 37 W. R. 42-C. A. 4. PRACTICE. a. In General. Q. B. 293; 51 L. T. 5 parte, Wallace, In re, 14 M. B. R. 246-C. A. Service.]- Where a deb Substituted Service-D creditors' petition in ban sented dies before service him, there is no power Bankruptcy Act, 1883, or to dispense with service service of the petition, proceedings must necessa Ex parte, Easy, In re, L. J., Q. B. 624; 35 W. R -C. A. tion.]-On appeal from an Advertisement in publication of a notice in and in the Times newspap to be good service of a bank the debtor :-Held, that u Form 16 of the Bankrupt registrar, on being satisfied avoiding personal service, make the order in question facts of the case there was appeal. Collinson, Ex par 4 M. B. R. 161-C. A. Form of Notice-Liquidator.]-By the Companies Act, 1862, ss. 95 and 133, a liquidator appointed in the voluntary winding-up of a company is empowered "to bring or defend any action, suit, or prosecution, or other legal proceeding, civil or criminal, in the name and on behalf of the company." A liquidator appointed in the voluntary winding-up of a company served upon the judgment debtor of the company a bankruptcy notice headed "Ex parte N., liquidator of the M. Bank, Limited." In the body of the notice the debtor was required to pay to N., "the liquidator of the bank," the sum "claimed by him as the amount due on the judgment, or to secure or compound for the same sum "to his satisfaction," &c. The debtor was not in any way misled by the terms of the notice:-Held, that the form of the notice must comply strictly with the provisions of s. 95, a substantial compliance not being sufficient, and therefore, that the notice, not being in the name of the company, was bad. parte, Winterbottom, In re, 18 Q. B. D. 446; 56 s. 148 of the Bankruptcy Winterbottom, Ex ruptcy petition presented by Petition by Company. L. J., Q. B. 238; 56 L. T. 168; 4 M. B. R. 5-D. | accompanied by the affidavi petitioning creditor is a lu Affidavit-Committee of L inquisition, the affidavit ver may be sworn by the commi Brady, In re, 19 L. R., Ir. 71 - Omission of Name-Amount of DebtIth Jan., judgment was recovered ebtor for 4461. and execution was issued agains which the sheriff levied, but a third pers claimed the goods, an interpleader ordr >tained, whereby upon payment of 201 ourt by the claimant, the sheriff w 1 to withdraw :-Held, that the fact the ditor had omitted to insert his name n ading of the bankruptcy notice, d being left" Ex parte"-the noos ued out by him in person and giving e information on the face of it who the was-did not render the notice invali fact of the notice claiming the whole 1467. without considering the 201, when stayed, only amounted to a formal ich the court would rectify. Lindary Bates, In re, 57 L. T. 417; 35 W. R. 66 . 192-D. re of Petition by Attorney.-A banktition by a creditor may be signed a by his duly constituted attorney. A ttorney authorised the attorney (inter commence and carry on, or to defend in equity, all actions, suits, or other s touching anything in which I my er personal estate may be in anywis ':-Held, that this power authorised y to sign on behalf of his principal cy petition against a debtor of the Richards, Ex parte, or Wallace, & ace, In re, 14 Q. B. D. 22; 54 L J. 51 L. T. 551; 33 W. R. 66; 1 -C. A. 258 of the Bankruptcy Rules, 1886, stating that | could not have been right. If the appeal a Evidence in Support of Petition-Adjourn-201; 1 M. B. R. 269-C. A. Evidence of Reasonable Ground.]-A debt after the service of a bankruptcy notice up him under s. 4, sub-s. 1 (g), of the Bankrupt Act, 1883, commenced an action against his c ditor to set aside the judgment on which su notice was founded, and prayed that an accou might be taken, and made other claims in t nature of a counterclaim. The debtor deliver the statement of claim in the action, and appli to the court to dismiss the bankruptcy noti The registrar, after reading the statement claim, adjourned the application sine die, wi liberty to apply:-Held, that the stateme of claim was not evidence, and that the registr before interfering with the operation of t bankruptcy notice, ought to have been satisfi by evidence that the debtor had at any ra some reasonable ground for bringing the actio Basan, Ex parte, Foster, In re, 2 M. B. R. 29 C. A. See also Meston, Ex parte, Kilday, In Transfer to Bankruptcy Court-Notice to Two Petitions. -On 19th Feb., 1885, b. Staying Proceedings. Pending Appeal-Discretion.]-A judgment The Court of Appeal will not interfere with clear that the legitimate business of the debt was carried on at Swansea, which was prin facie the place where his business transactic ought to be investigated, and that the petitic ing creditor in London, having for his own p pose delayed for several months to proceed wi his petition, the proper course was not to int fere with the order of the county court, a that an application should be made to t London Court to stay the proceedings in Lond Martin, Ex parte, Strick, In re, 3 M. B. 78-D. c. Application to Rescind Order. Payment of Creditors in full-Jurisdiction.] A debtor presented a bankruptcy petition a receiving order was made. The debtor's fath who was a partly secured creditor, immediate afterwards paid all the unsecured creditors full. The only other creditor was fully secur The debtor then applied to the court to resci the receiving order and to allow him to withdr his petition. The application was assented to the fully secured creditor and by the father. I judge held that he had no jurisdiction to resci the order, but he made an order staying further proceedings under the order :-Held, th there was jurisdiction to grant the applicatio Wemyss, Ex parte, Wemyss, In re, 13 Q. B. 244; 53 L. J., Q. B. 496; 32 W. R. 1002; 1 M. | under s. 103, sub-s. B. R. 157-D. 1883, and the proceed ferred under Rule 3 Rules, 1886, to the I Consent of Creditors-Proof.]-The registrar, before rescinding the appointment of a receiver, as being the court to or granting a stay of proceedings, is not bound tion against the debt to be satisfied that the consent of all the sented. The debtor p creditors has been obtained; but he must ex- to the Divisional Cour ercise his discretion as to the sufficiency of the the receiving order consent obtained in each case. Pending such course for the debtor rescission or stay of proceedings the debtor to the county court should not, even with the consent of all the peti- Hughes, Ex parte, I tioning creditors, be left in unfettered control of 73-D. the estate; but a stay of the advertisement by the receiver may properly be granted. Carr, Ex parte, Carr, In re, 35 W. R. 150-C. A. Official Receiver-A A receiving order havi debtor upon his own amination was adjour creditors accepted a under which they rece amount of their debts have the receiving ord the debtor with the creditors, the official re jected to the discharge the public examination ground that he was debtor's conduct :-Hel ceiver was entitled, und 1883, to appear in the Substitution of Scheme.]-After a receiving order had been made against the debtor on his own petition, a scheme was put forward by him which the creditors were willing to accept, and the debtor thereupon, with the assent of the creditors, applied to the county court to rescind the receiving order :-Held, that the registrar was right in refusing to rescind the receiving order under the circumstances, and that if the debtor was desirous of substituting a scheme, he must proceed in the manner provided by s. 18 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883. Dixon, Ex parte, Dixon, In re, 37 W. R. 161; 5 M. B. R. 291-C. A. Affirming the discharge of the rec 59 L. T. 776-D. Judgment Debt paid.]-On 30th Dec., 1886, judgment for 331. was recovered against the debtor, and in January, 1887, a judgment summons was issued; on 11th Feb. 1887, a receiving order in lieu of a committal, was made against the debtor under s. 103, sub-s. 5, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883. The debtor thereupon paid the debt and the judgment creditor consented to the receiving order being rescinded, but on application being made for that purpose, the county court judge held that the debtor had not shown that the consent of the creditors to such rescission had been obtained and he declined to make any order :-Held, that the debtor was entitled to have the matter referred to the registrar to report whether a majority of the creditors did assent or not. Whether where a receiving order in lieu of a committal is made under s. 103, sub-s. 5, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, it is necessary that the consent of the creditors should be shown, if the debtor pays the judgment creditor and applies to rescind, quære. Hughes, Ex parte, Hughes, In re, 4 M. B. R. 236-D. To what Court made.]-A receiving order having been made in the county court against a debtor, a compromise was subsequently agreed upon between the petitioning creditor and the debtor, and an application was made by the debtor with the consent of the petitioning creditor to the Divisional Court in Bankruptcy, to rescind the receiving order on the terms of such compromise :-Held, that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain such an application. Shurly, Ex parte, Shurly, In re, 5 M. B. R. 158 -D. the county court judge h the discharge. Leslie, I 18 Q. B. D. 619; 56 L. T M. B. R. 75-D. Notice to, of Appl a receiving order has debtor on a bankruptcy creditor is settled with, an debtor appeals for the p receiving order set aside, notice should be given to and where this was not charged the receiving o directed that the order sh for four days and notice receiver so as to enable hir he thought fit. Fletcher, In re, 4 M. B. R. 113-D. Appeal-Delay in Pro bankruptcy petition had before the day appointed debtor obtained the consen creditor to an adjournmen settlement, and a form of c sion of time was sent to Registrar by post, but on th the hearing the Registrar di for non-appearance. Notic been given by the creditor own petition, on which a r made. When the appeal ca an adjournment was taken that a scheme of arrangemen debtor might be considered, bu fell through, and the petitio proceeded with the appeal notice thereof had been giver delay which had occurred appeal, and that no sufficie been adduced to justify the c Transfer of Proceedings.]-On the hearing of a judgment summons in the county court, a receiving order was made against the debtor | notwithstanding such delay, t ler s. 103, sub-s. 5, of the Bankruptcy At 3, and the proceedings were thereupon tras ed under Rule 360 (1) of the Bankrupt es, 1886, to the London Bankruptcy C eing the court to which a bankruptcy pe against the debtor would properly be ed. The debtor paid the debt and appea e Divisional Court in Bankruptcy to res receiving order :-Held, that the prope e for the debtor to pursue was to sp le county court judge for a rebe es. Ex parte, Hughes, In re, 4 M. RI ial Receiver-Appearance at Hearingving order having been made against upon his own petition, his public a ion was adjourned; and ultimately, 's accepted a scheme of arrangema which they received less than the fill of their debts. In an application e receiving order discharged, made by tor with the concurrence of all the , the official receiver appeared and d the discharge of the order until afte ic examination had been held, on the that he was not satisfied with the conduct :-Held, that the official s entitled, under the Bankruptcy At ppear in the application and oppos rge of the receiving order; and the court judge had a discretion to refue rge. Leslie, Er parte, Leslie, Isn 619; 56 L. T. 569; 35 W. R. 395; -D. ice to, of Application.]-Where after order has been made against & bankruptcy notice, the petitioning ettled with, and with his assent the als for the purpose of having the der set aside, it would appear that 1 be given to the official receiver his was not done, the court dis receiving order as prayed, but the order should not be drawn up and notice given to the official to enable him to come forward if . Fletcher, Ex parte, Fletcher, May in Proceedings.]-After a tition had been presented, but appointed for the hearing, the the consent of the petitioning adjournment with a view to s a form of consent to an extenas sent to the County Court st, but on the day appointed for Registrar dismissed the petition nce. Notice of appeal having e creditor the debtor filed his which a receiving order was e appeal came on for hearing vas taken by consent, in order arrangement proposed by the nsidered, but this subsequently the petitioning creditor now The appeal a year after the been given :-Held, that the occurred was fatal to the no sufficient reason having stify the court in hearing it, ch delay, the appeal must be Held, that, notwithstanding the resolution the 28th of March, and having regard to t fact that the receiver had not been discharg the liquidation proceedings were still pendi and that if the adjudication order was discharg no other creditor would be injured, for that t court would have jurisdiction to adjudicate t debtor a bankrupt on the application of any oth creditor. The adjudication was accordingly d charged on the terms of payment proposed, a on the undertaking of the debtor to apply to t Court of Bankruptcy for leave to summon a fre first meeting of the creditors. MHenry, parte, M Henry, In re, 24 Ch. D. 35; 53 L. Ch. 27; 48 L. T. 921; 31 W. R. 873-C. A. Held, by Baggallay and Cotton, L.JJ., a semble, per Bowen, L.J., that the court h jurisdiction to order a fresh first meeting of creditors under the petition. Ib. VII. ADJUDICATION. Jurisdiction-Act of Bankruptcy committed before commencement of Bankruptcy Act, 1883.] -A debtor filed a liquidation petition in December, 1883, and a receiver of his property was appointed. On the 15th of January, 1884, the adjourned first meeting of the creditors was held, when the creditors separated without passing any resolutions, and without again adjourning the meeting. On the 21st of January one of the creditors presented a bankruptcy petition against the debtor under the Act of 1869, alleging the filing of the liquidation petition as an act of bankruptcy. On the 1st of February, the registrar adjudicated the debtor bankrupt on the petition. The debtor was present, and raised no objection to the jurisdiction of the court to make the order. The receiver had not been discharged. Annulling of Adjudication Jurisdiction.] On the 14th of March (Pratt, Ex parte, 12 Q. B. The discharge of a bankrupt having been grant D. 334, having meanwhile been decided), the on payment of a dividend of 78. 6d. in the pou debtor applied to the registrar for a rehearing to the creditors, the county court judge, of the petition, and a reversal of the order of application made to him, subsequently annull adjudication, on the ground that there was no the bankruptcy :-Held, that there was no pow jurisdiction to make it. The registrar refused to annul a bankruptcy outside the provisions the application:-Held, that the court had no the Bankruptcy Act, and that in any event, t jurisdiction to make the adjudication under the county court judge was wrong in making t Act of 1869 on the ground that an act of bank-order under the circumstances of the prese ruptcy had been committed, but that it would case. Board of Trade, Ex parte, Gyll, In have had jurisdiction to make it under the power 58 L. J., Q. B. 8; 59 L. T. 778; 37 W. R. 16 given by sub-s. 12 of s. 125 of that act. Held, 5 M. B. R. 272-D. therefore, that, as the objection had not been raised before the registrar, a rehearing ought not to be allowed. May, Ex parte, May, In re, 12 Q. B. D. 497; 53 L. J., Q. B. 571; 50 L. T. 744; 32 W. R. 839; 1 M. B. R. 50-C. A. adjudication of bankruptcy may be annull Limit of Time.]-In a proper case upon an application made after the expiration the time limited for appealing from it. Se 10 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, has no applic tion to an appeal from an adjudication, or to application to annul it. Brown, Ex parte L. R., Ch. 304), explained; Johnson, Ex pas (12 Ch. D. 905), distinguished. Geisel, Ex par Stanger, In re, 22 Ch. D. 436; 53 L. J., Ch. 34 48 L. T. 405; 31 W. R. 264-C. A. Costs.]-An order was made by t bankruptcy, on the ground that the debtor m be presumed to have been dead when it w made. Probate had been granted of a will execut by the debtor :-Held, that the costs and char of the trustee properly incurred, and the co of all parties of the application to annul and the appeal, must be paid out of the estate, a that the executors must confirm all acts prope done by the trustee in the bankruptcy. Ib. 1. WHAT PASSES TO TRUSTEE. a. Leaseholds-Disclaimer. Agreement for a Lease.]-The right of disclaimer conferred on trustees by s. 55 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, is not limited to property of the bankrupt divisible amongst his creditors as defined by s. 44, but extends to any property as defined by s. 168, from which no benefit can accrue to the bankrupt's estate. A debtor held his business premises for a term of years under an agreement for a lease, and entered into a binding contract for the sale and assignment of his business and his business premises to a company, but became bankrupt before the completion of the contract :-Held, that the debtor's interest in the agreement for a lease was in the nature of land burdened with onerous covenants which his trustee in bankruptcy could under the circumstances disclaim. rupt, the trustee sho pensation to the lan pation of the leaseh the occupation has a have regard not me the bankrupt's estat whether the possess trustee with a view Arnal, Ex parte, W 53 L. J., Ch. 134; 49 Isherwood, Ex parte The rule as laid in preference to that in Izard, Ex parte (2 the trustee in a ban The court ordered o giving him leave to bankrupt's place of part of the time duri been in occupation a parte, Maughan, In re, 14 Q. B. D. 956; 54 for rent, and the land Monkhouse, Ex session of the bankrup L. J., Q. B. 128; 33 W. R. 308; 2 M. B. R. 25-place bills on the prem Field, J. to be let, and that ap was to be made to him claim, the landlord is Where a trustee in Disclaimer binding on Crown.] visions of s. 55 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, as - The proto the disclaimer of onerous property, are "pro-advantage has accrued visions relating to the remedies against the use of the landlord's pr property of a debtor" within the meaning of adjudication. Brooke, s. 150 of that Act, and are therefore binding Cave, J. upon the Crown. Commissioners of Woods and Forests, Ex parte, Thomas, In re, or Thomas, Ex parte, Trotter, In re, 21 Q. B. D. 380; 57 L. J., Q. B. 574; 59 L. T. 447; 36 W. R. 375; 5 M. B. R. 209-D. Application for leave to Disclaim-Extension of Time.]-Although the three months given to a trustee by s. 55, sub-s. 1, within which to disclaim onerous property, may have expired, the court has power under s. 105, sub-s. 4, to grant the trustee an extension of time. When a trustee applies for an extension of time, he should give some good reason for the indulgence he asks, and if the rights of other parties will be prejudiced by the time being extended, the court will, as a general rule, put the trustee upon terms. Foreman, Ex parte, Price, In re, 13 Q. B. D. 466; 33 W. R. 139; 1 M. B. R. 153-Cave, J. Service of Notice out of the Jurisdiction.] -Notice of motion by the trustee for leave to disclaim may be served out of the jurisdiction upon persons whose interests may be affected. Paterson, Ex parte, Rathbone, In re, 56 L. J., Q. B. 504; 57 L. T. 420; 35 W. R. 735; 4 M. B. R. 270-Cave, J. Joinder of Respondents.] when applying to the court under the BankA trustee ruptcy Act, 1883, s. 55, sub-s. 3, for leave to disclaim property may include in one application several distinct premises so long as there is one landlord or chief respondent who is affected by the whole application, although there may be other respondents who are only affected by part of it. Trustee, Ex parte, Whitaker, In re, 21 Q. B. D. 261;-57 L. J., Q. B. 527; 59 L. T. 255; 36 W. R. 736; 5 M. B. R. 178-Cave, J. made by a trustee in b Where an application the landlord for rent in sought to be disclaimed by the court unless the ditors, and the credito out of the property for advantage therefrom. 2 72-Cave, J. Upon dissolution of th A lease was granted t nanted to hold his share for S., who continued wards went into liquidat liquidation remained in hold premises. During trustee, T. was obliged to lord. Upon an applicat leave to disclaim the leas of the trustee repaying disclaim ought only to be during the trustee's oc parte, Salkeld, In re, 13 Q. B. 96; 51 L. T. 876; 3 s. 55 of the Bankruptcy Where a trustee seeks to may, under sub-s. 3, perm fixtures. Painter, Ex pa Wills, J. Q. B. D. 738; 33 W. R. August, 1886, the agent on Conduct of Truste company took possession sub-lease previously grant original lessee, as security August, the debtor was adj such agent was appointed ruptcy, but he neverthele bank, which was worked fo session of the said quarry On 6th Nov. the agent, as Terms on which Leave granted.]-In determining whether, on giving leave to the trustee in a bankruptcy to disclaim a lease of the bank-ruptcy, applied to the co |