Barca v Mears
The exceptional circumstances test in bankruptcy cases is compatible with the right to respect for private and family life, and a child's educational needs were not exceptional.
Facts
Mr Barca was declared bankrupt. His trustee in bankruptcy applied for an order for sale of his home. Mr Barca argued that sale should be postponed because his son, who had special educational needs, stayed with him part of the time and attended a nearby school. He also argued that the strict approach in Re Citro was incompatible with article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Legal principle
Nicholas Strauss QC, sitting as a deputy judge, held that sale should be ordered. The son's needs, although real, were not so exceptional as to justify postponement under section 335A of the Insolvency Act 1986. He suggested that the approach in Re Citro, which treated only unusual circumstances as exceptional, might need to be reconsidered in the light of article 8, so that the court focuses on whether the consequences of sale are exceptionally severe, but held that this did not change the result in this case.
Related cases on co-ownership and trusts of land
- Bank of Ireland Home Mortgages Ltd v Bell [2001] 2 FLR 809
- Bull v Bull [1955] 1 QB 234
- Burgess v Rawnsley [1975] Ch 429
- Re Citro (A Bankrupt) [1991] Ch 142
- Re Draper's Conveyance [1969] 1 Ch 486
- First National Bank plc v Achampong [2003] EWCA Civ 487, [2004] 1 FCR 18
- Goodman v Gallant [1986] Fam 106
- Harris v Goddard [1983] 1 WLR 1203
Studying land law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
