Fowler v Padget (1798) 7 Term Rep 509; 101 ER 1103 is an old UK insolvency law case, which concerned what amounted to an act of bankruptcy.
Contents
Facts
Fowler claimed that Padget had unlawfully broken into his house, trespassed and converted his goods. Padget claimed that he was justified in doing so, because under the Act, 13 Eliz. c. 7, Fowler had committed an act of bankruptcy. Fowler, a trader based in Manchester, traveled to London due to the failing business of one of his creditors. In the ten days following his departure, Fowler's creditors visited his home and suspected that he had left under fraudulent pretenses, as per the Act of 1603, 1 Jac. 1, c. 15.
Judgment
Lord Kenyon held that there had been no act of bankruptcy, and Fowler's intention in leaving his house was not fraudulent. Under the Act, only intent to defraud creditors would amount to an Act of bankruptcy.
Ashurst J, Grose J and Lawrence J gave concurring opinions.