(1)
In this section “income payments agreement” means a written agreement between a bankrupt and his trustee or between a bankrupt and the official receiver which provides—
(a)that the bankrupt is to pay to the trustee or the official receiver an amount equal to a specified part or proportion of the bankrupt’s income for a specified period, or
(b)that a third person is to pay to the trustee or the official receiver a specified proportion of money due to the bankrupt by way of income for a specified period.
(2)A provision of an income payments agreement of a kind specified in subsection (1)(a) or (b) may be enforced as if it were a provision of an income payments order.
(3)While an income payments agreement is in force the court may, on the application of the bankrupt, his trustee or the official receiver, discharge or vary an attachment of earnings order that is for the time being in force to secure payments by the bankrupt.
(4)The following provisions of section 310 shall apply to an income payments agreement as they apply to an income payments order—
(a)subsection (5) (receipts to form part of estate), and
(b)subsections (7) to (9) (meaning of income).
(5)An income payments agreement must specify the period during which it is to have effect; and that period—
(a)may end after the discharge of the bankrupt, but
(b)may not end after the period of three years beginning with the date on which the agreement is made.
(6)An income payments agreement may (subject to subsection (5)(b)) be varied—
(a)by written agreement between the parties, or
(b)by the court on an application made by the bankrupt, the trustee or the official receiver.
(7)The court—
(a)may not vary an income payments agreement so as to include provision of a kind which could not be included in an income payments order, and
(b)shall grant an application to vary an income payments agreement if and to the extent that the court thinks variation necessary to avoid the effect mentioned in section 310(2).
Cases considering section 310A 4
[2020] EWHC 55 (Ch) · 24 January 2020Interprets
The court construed an income payments agreement under section 310A as a contract between the bankrupt and the trustee or official receiver, subject to statutory controls. The agreement’s contractual character meant that restitution of payments required the agreement first to be set aside. (see paras [5]-[7]; [15])
The court relied on the statutory description of an income payments agreement as a written agreement requiring specified payments from the bankrupt’s income or from money due to the bankrupt by way of income. (see paras [6]-[7])
The court noted that provisions of an income payments agreement may be enforced as if they were provisions of an income payments order, reinforcing the agreement’s statutory character and enforceability. (see paras [6]-[7])
The court relied on the statutory requirement that an income payments agreement specify its duration, subject to the statutory maximum period. (see para [6])
The court treated the parties’ power to vary the agreement by written agreement as evidence that section 310A creates a contractual instrument. (see para [7])
[2014] EWHC 1494 (Ch) · 12 May 2014Interprets
Section 310A creates a separate agreement-based regime for income payments, but does not make that regime mutually exclusive with section 310. The court may therefore retain jurisdiction to make an order despite a previous agreement (see paras [25]–[27]).
[2010] EWHC 1576 (Ch) · 17 February 2010Limits
Defines an income payments agreement as a written agreement requiring the bankrupt to pay a specified part or proportion of income for a specified period. The court treated the agreement as enforceable according to its statutory scheme. (see paras [3]–[6])
Applied the provisions of section 310 concerning income payments orders to income payments agreements. (see para [4])
Recognised the requirement that an income payments agreement specify its duration and permitted it to continue after discharge, subject to the statutory duration limit. (see paras [4], [25])
Limited the period during which the income payments agreement could operate to three years. The court held that compromising accrued arrears through an IVA did not extend that period. (see para [25])
Confirmed that an income payments agreement could be varied by written agreement between the parties, subject to the statutory limit. The trustee could therefore compromise accrued arrears within the IVA. (see para [25])
What each judgment says about section 310A is in the case-law panel in the full Act.