Skip to Content

Decisions of the Superior Courts of New South Wales, 1788-1899

Neely v. Rowley (1828) NSW Sel Cas (Dowling) 607; [1829] NSWSupC 83

insolvency - imprisonment for debt

Supreme Court of New South Wales

Trial, 19 December 1829

Source: Dowling, Select Cases, Vol. 2, Archives Office of N.S.W., 2/3462

[p. 260] [Where a Defendant had been declared Insolvent under 4 G 4. C. 96 and allowed to go at large for the purpose of assisting in collecting his debts, but refused to render any account of his effects to his trustees and was afterwards arrested for a debt contracted prior to his insolvency the Court refused to discharge him out of Custody.][1 ]

December 19th 1829

Neely v Rowley

The prisoner Rowley had been declared insolvent under the 4 G 4. C. 96. s. 23.  Trustees were appointed.  He was discharged out of Custody on the usual condition that he should surrender his Estate and effects and assist his Trustees in collecting in an[d] realizing his debts for the benefit of his Creditors.  after his discharge he was repeatedly called upon by his Trustees to deliver in a Schedule of his debts and effects but always referred them to his Attorney, and on one occasion he was extremely insolent.  The Plaintiff had recently taken him in execution for a debt contracted prior to the declaration of his insolvency.

S Stephen on a former day obtained a rule nisi to discharge the defendant out of Custody on the ground that he had been declared insolvent.

[p. 261] Rowe opposed his discharge on the ground above stated.

The Trustees and the insolvent were now examined viva-voce and it appearing that the prisoner had not rendered any account of his Estate and effects.

The Court ordered him to be remanded.




[1 ] For other 1829 cases on the then repealed insolvency provisions of the New South Wales Act, see In re Clegg, 1829; and In re Smith, 1829.

Published by the Division of Law, Macquarie University