Select a region
A Jersey doctor who was facing claims from creditors of more than £300m is applying to no longer officially be deemed 'bankrupt'.
Dr Gail Cochrane was officially deemed bankrupt in 2016, alongside the company Orb, for which she was believed to be sole shareholder at the time, with a number of creditors claiming sums that racked up collectively to over £1bn.
In 2017, however, she claimed that she owned very little and was not able to pay the creditors.
This was despite having previously told the Royal Court she was a "very wealthy woman, with holdings in dozens of companies worldwide", and an array of properties around the world.
Her income was then put into an account to the order of the Viscount for the purpose of paying creditors, and the Viscount also took control of assets valued at around £75,000.
In 2021, the Royal Court heard how the claims filed by potential creditors in Dr Cochrane’s désastre totalled £305,261,798.37.
However, most of the income in the Viscount-held account was used to cover her medical indemnity insurance and personal living costs.
Pictured: Dr Cochrane was first declared 'en désastre' by the Royal Court in 2016.
It was also heard at the time that, due to an ongoing High Court legal case in England, involving her former husband who has previously been convicted on fraud charges, the ownership of many of Dr Cochrane’s possessions remain the subject of proceedings, with "uncertainty" still hanging over how they will be distributed.
As such, the Court decided to extend the bankruptcy declaration, noting that: “...Until the English Proceedings are finally determined, including any appeals, it remains unclear whether and to what extent there will be any assets available to meet these claims.”
Dr Cochrane is now applying to recall the orders for désastre, but firstly applied to limit the ability of the Viscount to take part in the process.
In February, the Royal Court was asked to determine whether the Viscount should be a "proper party" to the application, beyond providing what Dr Cochrane's lawyer, Advocate Jeremy Garrood, described as "the administrative tasks of providing an up-to-date list of creditors".
It was further argued that the views of the Viscount on the application would be "irrelevant", and concerns were expressed that "the Viscount might be acting unlawfully or prejudicially to the interests of the Representor by incurring unnecessary costs in the désastre process", according to the judgment published this week.
Pictured: Dr Cochrane's former husband, Gerald Smith, who was previously convicted of fraud.
But Commissioner Matthew Thompson, who heard the case, disagreed, saying the Viscount would be able to provide helpful information.
Giving an example, he explained that, if a debtor were to dispute that certain individuals were creditors, the Viscount would be able to provide evidence to the Royal Court in relation to the claim.
"Ultimately however, it may well be for the creditor concerned to set out why it is a creditor if the position is disputed or is contentious," the Commissioner continued.
"In this case I ordered that all creditors identified by the Viscount should be notified of the proceedings and given an opportunity to indicate whether they wished to take part. I also required the Representor to file all her affidavit evidence that she intended to rely on in support of her application and to make the same available by the time creditors were to be notified of the application. This was to enable creditors to understand the stance the Representor was taking in relation to each creditor's claim and to evaluate whether that creditor wished to challenge the Representor's stance."
The Commissioner added that, while the Viscount's role was therefore "limited" to an extent, they "should not be fettered in making submissions on the exercise of such a discretion again while taking care not to fight battles on behalf of creditors who are able to protect their own position".
"Accordingly, I determined that the Viscount should be joined as a Respondent to the Representation and should be entitled to have access to all material filed by the Representor."
Doctor who allegedly owes £1.25 billion says she has no money (2017)
Doctor potentially owing over £300m has bankruptcy order extended (2021)
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.