SEVERE CRITICISM

Hokitika Guardian, 28 June 1933, Page 8

SEVERE CRITICISM

DUTY. OF JUDGMENT CREDITORS. NELSON, June 26. Failure of judgment creditors to enquire into the position of judgment debtors before bringing them to court by the use of “recklessly false” affidavits, was criticised by Mr T. E. Maunsell, S.M. A judgment debtor against whom no order wag made when he appeared on a judgment summons last week, again appeared to-day on a _ judgment summons from a different judgment creditor; “Have you been in a position to pay this since last week?” enquired the magistrate. “No sir,” was the debtor’s reply. “Well, I think that is all you can do in the matter,” said his Worship addresßing counsel for the judgment creditor. Reference was made to tlm clause in the affidavit which reads: “I believe the defendant, after providing for reasonable maintenance of himself and his family, has since the date of judgment had sufficient money to pay the debt,” and which is sworn to by the judgment creditor or his representative. The magistrate said such affidavits were issued vvfth a recklessly false statement in them. It had become a very lax proceeding and a mere farce, the statement that they had “reason to believe” being sworn ag a matter of formality. It was a practice which needed pulling up. “I will make no order, and will allow the debtor 10s 6d costs,” said the magistrate. He added that a recommendation that the grounds for the belief that the debtor could pay should be stated with the affidavit.