Judgment
David Donaldson Q.C.:
(a) Mr Carlos Layne, the First Defendant, was a tenant of the Second Defendant (“WDC”) in respect of commercial premises at 148 Desborough Road, High Wycombe between 2001 and 2007, when the lease was surrendered leaving substantial arrears of rent outstanding. On 15 July 2009 WDC obtained default judgment in respect of these arrears for £32,308.53 and costs.
(b) In addition, Mr Layne failed to make various payments of business rates (£4,904.54) and council tax (£19,663. 02) in respect of both those premises and other properties for periods between 2004 and 2009, leading to liability orders in those sums.
(c) On 16 March 2011 WDC served a statutory demand in the sum of £57,361.09 in respect of that judgment and those orders. Unpaid, it formed the basis of an amended petition for bankruptcy against Mr Layne.
The district judge granted permission for the amendment at a hearing on 5 May 2011. At the same time he adjourned the hearing of the amended petition until 7 July 2011, directing that Mr Layne should file and serve an affidavit setting out his grounds for opposing the petition on the basis that he was offering security for the debt, and provide details of all charges over his property. In the event, while detailing the charges, the witness statement which Mr Layne produced on 25 May 2011 offered no security and only an immediate payment of £1,000 and instalments for the time being of £100 per month, with the hope of increasing that to £200 if and when he found full-time employment (being currently on JSA) . In subsequent correspondence, he revised these figures upwards, but they were rejected by WDC on 4 July 2011 on the grounds the offer was not an offer of security, it was not reasonable, and there was no reasonable prospect of payment in full being made within a reasonable time. Mr Layne set out these matters in a letter to the court dated 7 July 2011, attaching copies of his correspondence with WDC, which he suggested was acting unreasonably in refusing his offer.
The district judge began the hearing on 7 July 2011 by noting that the letter made no mention of an offer of security, as had been mooted on the previous hearing. Thus, he observed, the only defence being advanced was that the refusal to accept the offer of instalments was unreasonable, which, given the time that would be required for full payment, the judge did not accept. Having satisfied himself that there were no supporting creditors, he therefore ma
