Administration of Justice Act 1970: Enforcement of Debt Provisions
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1971.tb02313.x |
| Author | C. Glasser |
| Date | 01 January 1971 |
| Published date | 01 January 1971 |
JAX.
1971
STATUTES
61
possible that a Merchant Shipping Act of
1927
might have made
the current model look a very tame affair indeed.
NORMAN
LEWIS.
ADMINISTRATION
OF
JUSTICE
ACT
1970
:
ENFORCEMENT
OF
DEBT
PROVISIONS
THE Act legislates for
a
number of areas covered by the recommen-
dations of the Payne Committee on the Enforcement
of
Judgment
Debts which reported in
1969.'
The power of
a
court
to
imprison
civil debtors under the provisions of the Debtors Act
1869
is
restricted
to
maintenance proceedings and certain other types of
judgment debts; the power to make attachment of earnings orders,
now possible in respect of maintenance orders and in certain
criminal proceedings, is extended to the full range of civil judgment
debts; the power of
a
county court to make an administration
order is widened; unlawful harassment of debtors is made
a
criminal offence, and additional powers are given to the court in
proceedings for the possession of mortgaged premises.
Although the Act contains some useful provisions
it
represents
a
weak and half-hearted attempt
to
deal with an important social
and economic problem through the medium of civil procedural
reform. By failing to implement the recommendations of the Payne
Committee in relation to the setting
up
of an Enforcement Office,
the framers of the Act have shifted the emphasis from the Com-
mittee's coherently argued interconnecting set of proposals, de-
signed
to
balance out a number of conflicting interests, towards an
attempted solution of the problem based on
a
crude substitution of
the attachment of earnings provisions for the existing role of
imprisonment in the debt process. Few are likely to be satisfied
wiith the new arrangements when they come into force. The failure
to link the proposals of the Payne Committee with the reform of
consumer credit arrangements and research into the circumstances
of individual judgment debtors will lead to the need for further
inquiry within a short time. The perhaps under-estimated difficul-
ties inherent in the attachment provisions may arise more swiftly
in the absence of an Enforcement Office. In spite of the new
pro-
visions, existing complaints about the efficacy and justice of the
present arangement are likely to continue
in
the absence of a wider
overall assessment
of
the process.
The
present
position
It
is important to see the institutional and procedural arrange-
ments for the recovery of judgment debts in the context of the
supply and control of consumer credit. In the nineteenth century,
1
Ciiind.
3909.
To continue reading
Request your trial