Jump to content
postggj

6.5 (4) insolvency rules 1986

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3572 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

my internet conectionkeeps dropping out every 20 seconds, its driving me nuts

 

can someone please post up the

 

RULE 6.5 (4) OF THE INSOLVENCY RULES 1986

 

before i throw this bt piece of crap out the window

 

many thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this what you want?

 

6.54.— Security

(1) The following applies where an insolvency practitioner is appointed to be interim receiver

under section 286(2).

(2) The cost of providing the security required under the Act shall be paid in the first instance by

the interim receiver; but—

(a) if a bankruptcy order is not made, the person so appointed is entitled to be reimbursed

out of the property of the debtor, and the court may make an order on the debtor accordingly,

and

(b) if a bankruptcy order is made, he is entitled to be reimbursed out of the estate in the

prescribed order of priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cant see the relevance

 

its 6.5 (4)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(4) The court may grant the application if—

(a) the debtor appears to have a counterclaim, set-off or cross demand which equals or

exceeds the amount of the debt or debts specified in the statutory demand; or

(b) the debt is disputed on grounds which appear to the court to be substantial; or

© it appears that the creditor holds some security in respect of the debt claimed by the

demand, and either Rule 6.1(5) is not complied with in respect of it, or the court is satisfied

that the value of the security equals or exceeds the full amount of the debt; or

(d) the court is satisfied, on other grounds, that the demand ought to be set aside.

 

insolvency.gov.uk


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thats it

 

many

many thanks

 

bloody internet conection:-x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some further info re 6.5 4 b

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/in-practice/benchmarks/commercial-considerations-can-influence-discharge-liabilities

 

1986 Rules in full [ATTACH]22830[/ATTACH]

insolvency.gov.uk

Edited by Ford
typo

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...