Insolvency Act 1986, section 366

Inquiry into bankrupt’s dealings and property

Part IX Bankruptcy

(1)At any time after a bankruptcy order has been made the court may, on the application of the official receiver or the trustee of the bankrupt’s estate, summon to appear before it—

(a)the bankrupt or the bankrupt’s spouse or former spouse [F958or civil partner or former civil partnerF958] ,

(b)any person known or believed to have any property comprised in the bankrupt’s estate in his possession or to be indebted to the bankrupt,

(c)any person appearing to the court to be able to give information concerning the bankrupt or the bankrupt’s dealings, affairs or property.

The court may require any such person as is mentioned in paragraph (b) or (c) to submit [F959a witness statement verified by a statement of truthF959] to the court containing an account of his dealings with the bankrupt or to produce any documents in his possession or under his control relating to the bankrupt or the bankrupt’s dealings, affairs or property.

(2)Without prejudice to section 364, the following applies in a case where—

(a)a person without reasonable excuse fails to appear before the court when he is summoned to do so under this section, or

(b)there are reasonable grounds for believing that a person has absconded, or is about to abscond, with a view to avoiding his appearance before the court under this section.

(3)The court may, for the purpose of bringing that person and anything in his possession before the court, cause a warrant to be issued to a constable or prescribed officer of the court—

(a)for the arrest of that person, and

(b)for the seizure of any books, papers, records, money or goods in that person’s possession.

(4)The court may authorise a person arrested under such a warrant to be kept in custody, and anything seized under such a warrant to be held, in accordance with the rules, until that person is brought before the court under the warrant or until such other times as the court may order.

Cases considering section 366 22

Hickling v Baker

[2007] EWCA Civ 287 · 4 April 2007

The court treated examination under section 366 as an alternative enforcement procedure and ordered Mr Baker to attend a further examination before a High Court judge. (see paras [12], [41], [49], [52]-[55])

Paul Steven Cooper & Ors v Vladimir Dashi (aka Rugova)

[2024] EWHC 2102 (Ch) · 9 August 2024

Interprets the statutory power as requiring a reasonable requirement for information or documents needed by office holders to perform their functions, followed by a balancing exercise weighing importance against oppression and burden. Applies that test to grant disclosure in limited categories but refuse wider disclosure and private examination. (see paras [3]-[4]; [30]-[33])

IN THE MATTER OF MOSE KRAUS (IN BANKRUPTCY)

[2023] EWHC 173 (Ch) · 1 February 2023

The court treated the section 366 process as seeking both examination and the production of information and documents. It held that the proceedings substantially achieved that purpose despite no final examination order. (see paras [141]-[146]) The court identified the power to summon persons able to provide information about the bankrupt’s dealings, affairs or property, or require statements and documents. Eurobeam and Mr Roth fell within that description. (see paras [106]; [141])

2 more judgments, and what each says about section 366, are in the case-law panel in the full Act.

Amendments and notes

3 notes from legislation.gov.uk

Amendments

  1. F958Words in s. 366(1)(a) inserted (5.12.2005) by Civil Partnership Act 2004 (c. 33), ss. 261(1), 263, Sch. 27 para. 120; S.I. 2005/3175, art. 2(2) (subject to art. 2(3)-(5))
  2. F959Words in s. 366(1) substituted (6.4.2010) by virtue of The Legislative Reform (Insolvency) (Miscellaneous Provisions) Order 2010 (S.I. 2010/18), art. 5(7)

Modifications

  1. C1097S. 366 applied (with modifications) by S.I. 1986/1999, art. 3, Sch. 1 Pt. II