Former executive in constitutional challenge bankruptcy act

Former executive in constitutional challenge to bankruptcy act - Dearbhail McDonald -> … 61559.html

I’m surprised this hasn’t generated more comment here. This is on the face of it great news as far as I am concerned. Bankruptcy reform is my preferred solution for debt forgiveness. Hopefully this lady can force the government’s hand on introducing new law. How difficult can it be? Copy and paste from UK?

No one?

Sympathy in this case is low is my guess.

Otherwise, I don’t think there is a single dissenter to the view that the bankruptcy act needs to be changed.

I’ve made the point before, it is only when the upper-echelons of society are affected by bankruptcy that a change in the law shall follow.

Don’t know if this challange will succeed, but it adds to the momentum.

Probably something to do with the fact a little googling on the individuals, companies and scheme involved gives one the feeling that the whole situation boils down to a not very appealing poster child for demanding change.

If it was someone with a big negative equity, losing their job, dealing with a disability and trauma then maybe…

Who cares about the agent of change? It’s a means to an end…

Well, I do. It is important that the old scheme is seen to be incredible in its application to ‘ordinary’ people, not just incredible in its application to the class of people formerly known as rich (but actually just deeply over-borrowed). Otherwise we will end up with a law structured to meet the demands of the court in this particular case and not in cases that affect ‘ordinary’ people - e.g. something that still demands high costs to satisfy the case.

All this case does is strike down the existing regime if successful. It does not shape a new system. It just leaves a vacuum which the lawmakers will be forced to fill. As far as I am aware the legislation is ready, the law reform commission has already reported on this area. We just need something to force the government’s hand. Would you object to Sinn Fein forcing Fianna Fail to hold a by-election in Donegal because you disagree with Sinn Fein?

I’m with yogan on this one. I don’t think we need to prove the current regime is unconstitutional…however what would happen here is we would wind up with a new regime that is indelibly linked to bankruptcy only being reformed when the elite are affected.

To be blunt about it, she’s not a case in favour of reforming bankruptcy. She’s a case in favour of leaving it exactly as it is to warn the next generation of wannabee business leaders that if they screw up, there is a pretty heavy cost.

Come back to me when you have a bunch of home owners somewhere in Leitrim or West Clare who have supersized mortgages because they were priced out of their own locality who have seen household income half owing to circumstances outside their own control and we may talk then. For now, the only reason I want bankruptcy reformed is not for the benefit of the elite or wannabee elite, but for the benefit of the Plain People of Ireland, per Myles.

The Times also has an article, reference is made to another party to the proceedings

XX What a mess. … 47269.html

No, that’s not the same. It was open to the people of Donegal to elect whom they liked. No legal changes were made as a result of the ruling - the interpretation of the constitution was that people couldn’t be left without representation indefinitely. If FF had taken the case to avoid having a bye-election, I would have been unhappy (as I will be when some government tries to have that case over-turned in future).