Bankruptcy - sale of jointly owned property ?

[The Phantom]

Hello, having been in a similar but not identical situation I wanted to put a thought to the forum for some input
I am a joint property owner with a bankrupt and although the property is in negative equity by approx 30K and therefore not affected by a sale the scenario has bothered me from the beginning.
I was amazed to learn that your property can still be sold even if you are not bankrupt, i.e. only a non bankrupt co-owner, i.e. your property can be sold to pay off someone elses debts and all you get is a letter from a trustee telling you resistance is futile and if sold you get the cash for your 50% of the beneficial interest
Now my thoughts on this I would like to put to the forum
Would such a forced sale of your property not contravene your Human Rights , the basic human right of safeguard of your property and a safe home ? (Only looking at this issue from the point of view of non bankrupt joint owners, keeping in mind this can nowadays be some friends who bought a property together, not even spouses / husband & wife)
Would a forced sale not be in conflict with their human rights as they may not agree to this sale and would loose not only their property but also their home and place to live through no fault of their own ?

[rory32]

This seems a very subjective area of the law Phantom. Perhaps the following link will help a little Technical Manual Chapter 33: Miscellaneous points

[The Phantom]

True, but isn't that what the Human Rights are ? Very subjective indeed.
To ensure your very basic rights ?
I remember a lender / bank managed to overturn a famous judgement in relation to an unenforceable credit agreement arguing the point that this section of the CCA was basically going against their Human Rights (safeguard of property or something like this)
Wasn't this the trigger to change the CCa section 127 eventually ?
I was merely wondering from say the point of view of a few friends who bought a property together, why should all of them loose their home if only one is bankrupt ? Would this not be against their basic human right of safeguard of property as well ? I am not looking at it from the point of view of the bankrupt but from the non bankrupt co-owners only.
I suppose nobody will know until someone tests this by fighting it in court arguing it on this basis, but it is intriguing nevertheless