Court of Appeal
| Date | 01 July 1949 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201834901300305 |
| Published date | 01 July 1949 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Court of Appeal
SUMMARY
JURISDICTION
ACTS : COMMITTAL AND
JUDGMENT
SUMMONS
THE summary enforcement of an order for payment of a
civil
debt
is dealt with
by
the
Summary Jurisdiction
Act, 1879, s. 35,
sub-so
(2)
of which reads as follows:
" An order made
by
acourt of summary jurisdiction for
the
payment
of
any
such civil
debt
as aforesaid or of
any
instalment thereof, or for
the
payment
of
any
costs in
the
matter
of
any
such complaint, whether ordered to be
paid
by
the
complainant or defendant, shall not, in default of
distress or otherwise, be enforced
by
imprisonment, unless
it be proved to
the
satisfaction of such court or of
any
other
court
of summary jurisdiction for
the
same county borough
or place,
that
the
person making default in
payment
of such
civil
debt
instalment or costs either has, or has
had
since
the
date
of
the
order,
the
means to
pay
the
sum in respect
of which he has made default,
and
has refused or neglected,
or refuses or neglects, to
pay
the
same."
The
final para-
graph
of this long sub-section is
important-"and
in
any
such case
the
court shall have
the
same power of imprison-
ment
as a
county
court would for
the
time being have under
the
Debtors Act, 1869, for default of
payment
if such
debt
had
been recovered in
that
court,
but
shall
not
have
any
greater power."
Some fresh light has been thrown on this section
by
the
decision in
the
case of Barefoot v. Clarke (1949 1
All
E.R. 1039).
In
this case judgment
had
been entered in
the
county
court for £20
and
costs,
but
nothing
had
been
paid.
The
judgment creditor
then
took
out
ajudgment
summons,
and
at
the
hearing
the
evidence of
the
debtor
was
that
she
had
no means of her own
and
that
her
husband
would
not
pay
the
debt.
The
county
court judge dis-
believed her
and
acting on
the
assumption
that
she would
be allowed some money
by
her husband to spend on herself
281
To continue reading
Request your trial