in re; re Dixon v. Great Western Railway (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 300; 75 L.T. 539), 22, 51, i.; 75, v. v. Playfair Bros. and Others (L.R. 72, vi. Bamber ; in 75 L.T. 495), 83, i. ing Co. (L.R. (1897] 1 Ch. 176), 22, 48, v. Field, Ltd. (76 L.T. 81), 73, iv. 1 Q.B. 401), 75, i. L.T. 664), 83, iii. Brown v. Maurice ; in re Maurice (75 L.T. 415), 55, ii. (75 L.T. 602), 22, 22, iv. ; 73, iii. e. p. Cox, Hughes and 418; 76 L.T. 119), 65, i. L.T. 407), 72, v. 83, v. 1 Ch. 315; 75 L.T. 581), 77, vii. Co. v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue (75 L.T. 572), 76, vii. Satanita) (L.R. (1897] A.C. 59), (1897] A.C. 90 ; 75 L.T. 556), 56, vi. 396 ; 75 L.T. 590), 69, iii. 266 ; 76 L.T. 16), 82, v. (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 422; 76 L.T. 18), 83, iy. L.T. 71), 83, ii. on-Hull (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 273 ; 75 L.T. 593), 64, i. 330; 75 L.T. 549), 79, i. [1897] 1 Ch. 251; 75 L.T. 638), 74, iv. 74, i. A.C. 97; 75 L.T. 457), 79, v. EDISON GENERAL ELECTRIC Co. v. WESTMINSTER AND VANCOUVER 58, ii. Lipton (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 240 ; FAVARD V. FAVARD (75 L.T. 664), 56, i. 271; 76 L.T. 107), 66, iv. (L.R. [1897] P. 22), 74, viii. 1 Ch. 64), 22, 49, ii. GEILIGER V. GIBBS (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 479; 76 L.T. 111), 74, vii. Cory (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 335), 79, vii. Ltd. V. Dawson (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 115 ; 75 L.T. 575), 73, v. 1 Q.B. 348; 76 L.T. 86), 61, vii. The Manila Railway Co. (L.R. HALFORD V. HALFORD (Bryce inter- vening) (L.R. [1897] P. 36; 75 L.T. 520), 83, vi. in re (75 L.T. 449), 80, v. Hayes Common (Conservators of) v. Bromley Rural District Board 51), 58, iv. Society (76 L.T. 109), 74, vi. Viscountess (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 483 ; 76 L.T. 103), 81, iv. Interest Society, Ltd.; in re Hill's 78, i. 1 Q.B. 192; 76 L.T. (59), 63, vi. 1 Ch. 182 ; 75 L.T. 610), 63, v. 1 Q.B. 346; 76 L.T. 57), 82, i. 462), 71, i. (75 L.T. 684), 75, ii. L.T. 453), 55, i. (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 325; 76 L.T. Lancaster Banking Co., Ltd., in re (75 L.T. 647), 59, i. of) v. Overseers of Barrow-in- 72, i. 76 L.T. 135), 70, iv. 56, ii. in re Roundwood Colliery Co., Ltd. 508 and 641), 59, ii. 260; 76 L.T. 45), 69, iv. (75 L.T. 687), 69, v. and Discount Co., Ltd., v. Crease 87), 57, ii. Ltd., in re (75 L.T. 658 and 76 L.T. 98), 60, vii. v. Commissioners of Sewers of vi. v. Llandudno Improvement Com- INCANDESCENT Gas Light Co., LTD. v. New INCANDESCENT (SUNLIGHT (76 L.T. 47), 70, vi. in re (75 L.T. 639), 60, i. [1897] 1 Ch. 251; 75 L.T. 638), Janet Court, the (L.R. [1897] P. 59; 76 L.T. 172), 80, i. 374; 76 L.T. 136), 22, 45, v.; 66, ii. KENT COUNTY COUNCIL V. LORD GERARD (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 351 ; 76 L.T. viii. 75 L.T. 421), 64, v. ham v. Gill (L.R. (1897) 1 Q.B. MANCHESTER AND MILFORD RAILWAY, in re (L.R. (1897] 1 Ch. 276; 75 L.T. 416), 75, vi. shire Railway V. Guardians of Q.B. 117; 75 L.T. 472), 71, v. 75 L.T. 424), 79, iii. 248 ; 75 L.T. 552), 67, ii. Joseph (L.R. (1897] 1 Ch. 80, iv. 1 Q.B. 429 ; 76 L.T. 44), 74, iii. Others (75 L.T. 526), 58, iii. 1 Ch. 400; 76 L.T. 70), 80, iii. Penfield v. V. LACAVE AND Co. THE CRÉDIT LYONNAIS (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 148; re; 75 L.T. 576), 72, ii. (L.R. (1897) A.C. 129; 75 L.T. 75 L.T. 514), 56, vii. 65, ii. Meyrick v. Hargreaves; in re Meyrick (L.R. (1897]1 Ch.99; 75 L.T. 621), 76, viii. ment Committee of St. George's 75 L.T. 464), 76, ii. Others (L.R. (1897) 1 Q.B. 449 ; 76 L.T. 120), 77, iv. 1 Q.B. 378; 76 L.T. 156), 68, vi. 1Q.B. 326), 67, i. (1897] 1 Ch. 35 ; 75 L.T.579), 67, iii. tion v. New York Life Assurance Plymouth, Stonehouse, and Devon- port Tramway Co. v. The General 81, i. 1 Ch. 284 ; 75 L.T. 625), 80, ii. (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 97; 75 L.T. 491), 78, iv. P. 18; 75 L.T. 695), 72, iii. L.T. 513), 76, iii. England and Wales (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 407), 68, ii. Circuit (L.R. (1897) 1 Q.B. 370), 62, i. 22, 43, iv. (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 132), 22, 48, vi. [1897] 1 Q.B. 188; 76 L.T. 161), 64, ii. of) v. Croston Urban District 63, ii. [1897] 1 Q.B. 111; 75 L.T. 531), 65, iv. ton (75 L.T. 674), 67, iv. (L.R. (1897] 1 Ch. 85; 76 L.T. 95), 82, vi. Lee v. Roundwood Colliery Co., L.T. 508 and 641), 59, ii. [1897] 1 Ch. 71; 75 L.T. 498), 22, 31, iv. ; 81, ii. (1897] A.C. 1), 22, 52, i. 528; 76 L.T. 115), 62, iii. ODHAMS BROS., LTD. v. BRUNNING (75 L.T. 602), 22, 22, iv. ; 73, iii. ways Co. (L.R. (1897] A.C. 111; 75 L.T. 633), 70, iii. 1 Q.B. 197; 76 L.T. 60), 65, vi. PAGE V. RATLIFFE (76 L.T. 63), 70, v. 257 ; 76 L.T. 14), 64, iii. 134 ; 75 L.T. 484), 65, v. L.T. 597), 79, ii. 1 Ch. 25; 75 L.T. 475), 61, ii. twistle Urban District Council 689), 22, 21, i. ; 75, iii. (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 119; 75 L.T. 465; 75 L.T. 545), 61, vi. Rubber Co. (75 L.T. 488), 71, ii. VALLANCY v. FLETCHER (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 265 ; 76 L.T. 201), 57, iii. 1 Q.B. 421 ; 76 L.T. 152), 69, ii. Hutton (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 210; 75 L.T. 686), 69, i. Palmer (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 220), 22, 47, iii. Smith v. Wilkinson (L.R. (1897] i Ch. 158), 22, 41, vi. (L.R. [1897] P. 1), 62, iv. St. Olaves Union v. Canterbury Union (L.R. (1897) 1 Q.B. 438; 76 L.T. 88), 71, vi. (L.R. [1897] A.C. 22; 75 L.T. 426), 59, iji. 1 Q.B. 93), 78, v. raven, 22, 53, ii. 1 Q.B. 84), 69, vi. 1 Ch. 19; 75 L.T. 646), 74, v. (75 L.T. 487), 61, iii. (L.R. (1897] 1 Ch. 256 ; 76 L.T. Co., Ltd. (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 185 ; 75 L.T. 542), 73, i. missioners of Inland Revenue Steamboats, Ltd. (L.R. [1897) 1 Ch. 158), 22, 41, vi. Union (L.R. (1897] 1 Q.B. 343 ; 76 L.T. 58), 82, ii. Sons, in re an Arbitration (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 312; 76 L.T 35), 55, iv. P. 28; 75 L.T. 518), 82, vii. Bamber (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 75; 75 L.T. 495), 83, i. Others (76 L.T. 90), 63, i. 56, v. in re (L.R. (1897] 1 Ch. 15; 75 L.T. 574), 60, iv. (L.R. [1897] A.C. 11; 75 L.T. 398), 21, 82, vi. ; 77, ii. 502; 75 L.T. 694), 68, iii. 1 Q.B. 159), 66, i. 74), 82, iv. (L.R. [1897] í Ch. 536 ; 76 L.T. 61), Ward, in re; e. p. WARD (L.R. [1897) 1 Q.B. 266 ; 76 L.T. 37), 56, iv. [1897] 1Ch. 289; 76 L.T.112), 84, ii. v. Metropolitan Life Assurance 75 L.T. 412; 76 L.T. 73), 71, iv. v. Isaacs (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 226; 75 L.T. 564), 22, 45, iii.; 65, iii. Robinson (75 L.T. 677), 67, v. 86; 75 L.T. 470), 61, v. and Milling Co., Ltd. (75 L.T. 648), 60, vi. Q.B. 317), 22, 38, iii. 17; 75 L.T. 447), 22, 4, i. ; 56, iii. 123; 75 L.T. 577), 68, i. [1897] 1 Q.B. 314), 22, 38, iv. Ch. 151: 75 L.T. 480), 72, iv. (75 L.T. 446), 57, iv. 652), 58, vi. Ch. 110; 75 LT. 624), 73, ii. Quarterly Digest OF ALL REPORTED CASES IN THE Law Times and Law Reports FOR APRIL, MAY, AND JUNE, 1897. Barrister-at-Law. DIGEST. Where a case has already been given in the Digest for a preceding quarter, the additional report is given after the name of the case, with a reference to the volume of the Digest in which it first appeared, the thick number being the number of the volume. Actio Personalis :(i.) C. D.-Obstruction to Light—3 & 4 Wm. IV., c. 42, s. 2.-An obstruction to ancient light is an injury continuing from day to day, and therefore an action brought within six months of the decease of the tort feasor can be maintained against his executors or administrators though the obstruction was completed by the deceased more than six months before his death.-Jenks v. Viscount Clifden, L.R. (1897] 1 Ch. 694 ; 76 L.T. 382. Administration:(ii.) C. A.--Executor and Trustee—“Wilful Default”—Judicial Trustees Act, 1896 (59 & 60 Vict., c. 35), s. 3.—Where the executor of a solicitor was reasonably satisfied that he could not maintain an action to recover costs from a client of his testator, it was held that he was not guilty of wilful default; and that even if he had been technically liable, he would have been excused under sect. 3 of the Judicial Trustees Act, 1896.-In re Roberts ; Knight v. Roberts, 76 L.T. 479. (iii.) C. D.-Administrator's Costs—Interest-Set Off-0. lxv., 1. 1.--An executor or administrator is entitled to his proper costs, and will not be ordered to pay interests on sums not improperly paid away by him, and an administrator of an intestate is entitled to set off against the next-of-kin's share costs which the next-of-kin had been ordered to pay to him.-In re Jones ; Christmas v. Jones, 76 L.T. 454. H |