Page images
PDF
EPUB

Newton, in re (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 740) (60, vi., ante), New Union Mills Co. v. Great Western Ry. (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 290; 74 L.T. 791), 25, i.

Nichols V. North Metropolitan Railway and Canal Co. (74 L.T. 744) 30, iii.

Nobel's Explosives Co. v. Jenkins and Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 326; 75 L.T. 163), 30, i.

Norton v. Dashwood (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 497), 12, vii.

Nourse v. Liverpool Sailing Shipowners Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 16; 74 L.T. 317 and 543), 29, viii.

ODHAM BROS. v. BRUNNING (74 L.T. 370), 22, iv.

Ogston v. Stewart (L.R. [1896] A.C. 120), 10, vii.

Oldroyd v. Oldroyd (L.R. [1896] P. 175), 11, iii.

Ontario (Attorney-General for) v. Attorney-General for the Dominion (L.R. [1896] A.C. 348; 74 L.T. 533), 5, i.

Osborne v. Chocqueel (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 109; 74 L.T. 786), 2, iv. Otway v. Langham; re Langham (74 L.T. 611), 27, iii.

Overton & Co. v. Burn Lowe & Sons (74 L.T. 776), 21, vii.

PAGE V. RATLIFFE (74 L.T. 124), 20, ii.

Pain v. Bowden (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 301; 75 L.T. 102), 9, v. Paterson v. Gas, Light and Coke Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 476; 74 L.T. 640), 13, ii.

Peebles v. The Oswaldtwistle Urban District Council (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 159; 74 L.T. 721), 22, i. Pertwee v. Townsend (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 129; 75 L.T. 104), 25, vii. Phillips v. Evans (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 305; 74 L.T. 314), 26, vii. Phillips, re; e. p. Treboeth Brick Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 122), 23, vii. Pledge v. White (L.R. [1896] A.C. 187; 74 L.T. 323), 19, ii. Pollard's Settlement, in re (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 901 and 2 Ch. 552; 74 L.T. 374 and 75 L.T. 116), 17, iv. Poppleton v. Jones' Contract, re (74 L.T. 582), 34, i.

Portland Urban District Council and Tilley & Co., in re (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 98; 74 L.T. 703), 21, ix. Powell v. Birmingham Vinegar Brewery Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 54; 74 L.T. 509), 32, iii.

Pugh v. London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 248; 74 L.T. 724), 15, i.

REES V. BERNARDY (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 437; 74 L.T. 585), 4, iv.

Reg. v. Bexley Heath Railway Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 74; 74 L.T. 540), 25, iii.

Reg. v. Chambers (75 L.T. 76), 10, vi. Reg. v. Erdheim (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B.

260; 74 L.T. 734), 10, v.

Reg. v. Hopkins and Ferguson (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 652), 10, iii. Reg. v. Jameson and Others (75 L.T. 77), 9, vii.

Reg. v. Kent (Justices of) (L.R. [1896]

2 Q.B. 1; 74 L.T. 618 and 75 L.T. 11), 15, viii.

Reg. v. Lewis and Moss (L.R. [1896]

1 Q.B. 665; 74 L.T. 551), 34, iii. Reg. v. Lillyman (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 167; 74 L.T. 730), 10, iv. Reg. v. London and North-Western Railway (74 L.T. 624), 20, v. Reg. v. London (Justices of) (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 659; 74 L.T. 523), 3, ii.

Reg. v. Payne and Cooper (L.R.

[1896] 1 Q.B. 577; 74 L.T. 351), 10, ii.

Reg. v. Slade; e. p. Robinson (74 L.T. 656), 19, vii.

Reg. v. Smith (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B,

596; 74 L.T. 340), 2, iii.

Reg. v. Soden (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 634; 74 L.T. 520), 12, viii. Reg. v. St. Matthew, Bethnal Green (Vestry of) (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 95 and 319; 74 L.T. 701 and 75 L.T. 60),

Reg. v. St. Matthew, Bethnal Green (Vestry of) (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 95 and 319; 75 L.T. 60), 18, iv. Reg. v. Tynemouth Rural District Council (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 219; 75 L.T. 86), 16, iii.

Reg. v. Webb and Others (Justices and Grove) (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 487; 74 L.T. 428), 4, ii.

Reid (in the goods of) (L.R. [1896] P. 129; 74 L.T. 462), 24, ii. Remfry v. Surveyor General of Natal (75 L.T. 58), 5, iv.

Reynolds & Co. v. Tomlinson (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 586; 74 L.T. 591), 28, iv. Reynolds v. Urban District Council of Presteign (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 604; 74 L.T. 422), 16, vii. Rhymney Iron Co. v. Fowler (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 79), 26, iii. Richards v. Kidderminster (Mayor of) (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 212; 74 L.T. 483),

Richards v. Kidderminster (Overseers of) (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 212; 74 L.T. 483), 7, v.

Richmond Hill Steamship Co. v. Corporation of Trinity House (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 493 and 2 Q.B. 134; 74 L.T. 380 and 75 L.T. 8), 29, ii.

Robinson v. Harkin (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 415; 74 L.T. 777), 33, ii. Rochefoucauld v. Boustead (74 L.T. 783), 30, ii.

Rowland v. Michell (75 L.T. 65), 31, iv.

Ruck v. Ruck (L.R. [1896] P. 152), 11, vii.

Rudd v. Jones (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch.

554; 74 L.T. 714), 13, i. Rutland, the (75 L.T. 48), 28, vi.

SADLER V. GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (74 L.T. 561), 23, iv.

Salter v. Salter (75 L.T. 7), 21, vi. Sass, in re; e. p. National Provincial

Bank of England (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 12; 74 L.T. 383), 3, vii. Saul (in the goods of) (L.R. [1896] P. 151), 24, iv.

Savoy (Overseers, &c., of the) v. Art Union of London (L.R. [1896] A.C. 296; 74 L.T. 497), 20, iii. Scott, in re; e. p. Lewis (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 619; 74 L.T. 555), 3, v. Seaman v. Burley (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 344; 75 L.T. 91), 21, i. Sharland, re; Kemp v. Rozey, No. 2 (74 L.T. 664), 34, vii. Simonds v. Huntingdon; re Searancke (74 L.T. 339), 27, vi.

Smelting Co. of Australia, Ltd., v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 179; 74 L.T. 694), 26, vi.

Smith v. Gill (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 166), 9, vi.

Smith v. Hammond (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 571; 74 L.T. 590), 20, vii. Smith and Sons v. Wilson (75 L.T. 81), 5, v.

Smith v. Stuart; re Stuart (74 L.T. 546), 23, ii.

South African Trust and Finance Co., Ltd., re; e. p. Hirsch & Co. (74 L.T. 769), 6, v.

South Staffordshire Water Co. v. Sharman (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 44; 74 L.T. 761), 11, i.

Sowerby Urban District Council and the Mytholmroyd Urban District Council (74 L.T. 313), 16, ix. Spiers and Pond v. Barrett (L.R.

[1896] 2 Q.B. 65; 74 L.T. 697), 2, ii. Staples v. Eastman Photographic Materials Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 303 ; 74 L.T. 479), 7, vi. Stokell v. Heywood (74 L.T. 781), 15, ii.

Stuart and Olivant and Seadon's Contract, in re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 328; 74 L.T. 450), 33, vi.

THE V. V. BREAD Co. v. STUBBS (74 L.T. 704), 12, vi. Thomson v. Thomson (74 L.T. 801), 17, iii.

Tottenham v. Tottenham; in re Tottenham (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 628; 74 L.T. 376), 22, x.

Trevor v. Hutchins (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 844; 74 L.T. 470), 1, vi. Truman v. Pope; re Dudgeon (74 L.T. 613), 4, v.

Tunbridge Wells (Mayor of) v. Baird

and Others (74 L.T. 385), 16, viii. Turner v. Watson; in re Watson (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 925; 74 L.T. 453), 12, v.

UNITED KINGDOM MUTUAL STEAMSHIP ASSOCIATION V. HOUSTON & Co. (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 567), 2, vi. Universal Stock Exchange Co., Ltd. v. Strachan (L.R. [1896] A.C. 166; 74 L.T. 468), 31, ii.

VEUVE MONNIER ET SES FILS, LTD.; e. p. BLOOMENTHAL (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 525; 74 L.T. 670), 7, i. Von Linden (in the goods of) (L.R. [1896] P. 148), 24. iii.

WARD, re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 31; 74 L.T. 567), 31, i.

Watson v. White (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 9; 74 L.T. 702), 9, iii. Watkins, in re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 336; 74 L.T. 505), 17, i. Watkins v. Watkins (L.R. [1896] P. 222; 74 L.T. 636), 14, ii.

[blocks in formation]

White and Smith's Contracts and the Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, re (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 637; 74 L.T. 377), 33, viii. White v. Vestry and Parish of Fulham (74 L.T. 425), 18, iii. Whiteley v. Edwards (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 48; 74 L.T. 720), 17, vii. Whittaker v. Scarborough Post Newspaper Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 148; 74 L.T. 553), 22, iii.

Whitwham v. Westminster Brymbo Coal and Coke Co. (L.R. [1896] 1

Ch. 894; 74 L.T. 405 and 804), 32, vi. Willesden Local Board v. Wright (75 L.T. 13), 16, iv.

Williams v. Williams and Pocock (L.R. [1896] P. 153), 11, vi. Willson and Another v. Love and Others (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 626; 74 L.T. 580), 15, iv.

Wilmot v. Alton (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 254; 74 L.T. 813), 4, i.

Winstanley, the (74 L.T. 432 and 75 L.T. 133), 29, vi. Wood, re; Attorney General Anderson (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 596; 75 L.T. 28), 12, ii.

[ocr errors]

V.

YOUNG V. SOUTH AFRICAN AND AUSTRALIAN EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT SYNDICATE (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 268; 74 L.T. 527), 7, iv.

Administration:

DIGEST.

(i.) C. D.-Breach of Covenant to Pay Money-Indemnity-Right of Administrator to Retain.-A life tenant and a remainderman joined in a mortgage to secure an advance to the former who covenanted to pay all moneys falling due under the mortgage, and to keep the remainderman indemnified. The life tenant died without having paid off any part of the principal. The remainderman took out administration, and was held entitled to retain in respect of the life tenant's breach of covenant.-In re Allen; Adcock v. Evans, L.R. [1896]2 Ch. 345; 75 L.T. 136.

(ii.) C. D.-Deposit by Testator as Security for Sons-Legacy to SonsBankruptcy of Sons-Appropriation of Deposit-Claims on Sons' Interest under Will.--A testator deposited with a bank a sum of money as security for an advance to his sons, and by his will he made a bequest to each son. The sons became bankrupt, indebted to the bank a sum much in excess of the deposit. Held, that the trustees of the will were not entitled to retain the sons' interest under it, to recoup the testator's estate the loss of the deposit with the bank.-Lee v. Binns; in re Binns, L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 584; 75 L.T. 99.

(iii.) C. D.-Assets Mortgage-Equitable Charge by Sole Executor and Legatee-Unsatisfied Creditors-Priorities.-If an executor who is also residuary legatee parts by sale or mortgage for valuable consideration with the control of the testator's assets to a person who has no notice of any ground which rendered it improper for the executor so to deal with them, and who, if his title is equitable only, has given the proper notice, this person's purchase or mortgage is valid against any unsatisfied creditor of the testator.-Graham v. Drummond, L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 968; 74 L.T. 417.

(iv.) P. D.-Intestates Estates Act, 1890, s. 1-Court of Probate Act, 1857, s. 73-Grant to Executor of Widow who had not taken Administration.— The Court, under sect. 73 of the Probate Act, 1857, granted administration to the executor of a widow who died without having administered to her husband's estate, which was of the net value of less than £500. -In the goods of Bryant, L.R. [1896] P. 159.

(v) P. D.-Intestacy of Married Woman-Husband a Bankrupt-Estate under £30-Grant to Official Receiver-Citation and Sureties dispensed with-Bankruptcy Act, 1883, s. 121. (In the goods of Jane Turner, deceased, see 12 P.D. 18, followed.)-Where the husband of a deceased intestate was an undischarged bankrupt, the Court made a grant of her personal estate to the official receiver, and on account of the smallness of the estate dispensed with citation of the husband and accepted the administrator's personal bond.-In the goods of Sarah Jane Conolly, 74 L.T. 461.

(vi.) C. A.-Statute Barred Debt Due to Administrator-Right of RetainerPayment out of Court Claimed.-In the presence of the administrator of the estate of a deceased insolvent who had been liable to the administrator for a debt now statute barred, an order was made carrying over a fund of the deceased to a separate account and directing enquiry for persons beneficially interested. On the death of the administrator his personal representative took out letters of administration de bonis non to the insolvent estate and claimed to have the fund paid out to her. The Court refused to comply, as the object of

A

« PreviousContinue »