(cciii.) C. A.--Appeal-Trustee Relief Act.-Costs.-Trustees who have been ordered to pay costs personally under Trustee Relief Act cannot appeal from such order.-Re Hoskin's Trusts, 25 W.R. 779.

(cciv.) C. A.-Appeal in Criminal Matter.-A judgment of App. Div. Ct. against conviction for keeping gaming house on case stated is a judgment of the High Court in a criminal matter from which there is no appeal.-Blake v. Beech, L.R. 2 Ex. D. 335; 36 L.T 723.

(ccv.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Attachment.-A sale by a promoter to a company was set aside, and he was ordered to repay the purchase-money: before repayment he filed liquidation petition: Held that he was not a trustee or person acting in fiduciary relation to the company within Debtors' Act, 1869, s. 4, and was protected from attachment by Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 12.-Phosphate Sewage Co. v. Hartmont, 25 W.R. 742.

(ccvi.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Attachment- Ord. 44, r. 2.-Service of notice of motion to commit on a party or his solicitor is sufficient.-Richards v. Kitchen, 36 L.T. 730; 25 W.R. 602.

(ccvii.) C. A.-Attachment-Contempt―O. d. 42, r. 2.—Orders were made in an action for inspection of documents at the office of C., defendant's solicitor, and also for stay of proceedings till security was given for costs: E., plaintiff's solicitor, attended accordingly, but C. refused to produce documents or to accept proposed security: E. left, but afterwards returned and asked for the draft bond: C. refused, and abused and forcibly ejected E. Held that C. was not guilty of contempt of Court.-Re Clements, Republic of Costa Rica v. Erlanger, 46 L.J. Ch. 375; 36 L.T. 332.

(ccviii.) Q. B. Div.-Attachment-Examination-Conduct-Money

Ord. 45

r. 1.-A party applying for attachment of judgment debtor for default in appearing for examination must show by affidavit offer of conduct. money and good reason for examination away from his place of residence.-Protector Endowment Co. v. Whitham, 36 L.T. 467.

(ccix.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Attachment - Refusal to Obey Order-Lease.— Where a person has been directed to execute a lease, Court can only enforce the order by attachment, the Trustee Act, 1850, not having provided for such a case.-Grace v. Baynton, 25 W.R. 506.

(ccx.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Attachment-Service-Ord. 44, r. 2.-Service of notice of motion for attachment on defendant's solicitor is sufficient.Browning v. Sabin, L.R. 5 Ch. D. 511.

(ccxi.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Bill taken Pro Confesso.-Where a bill was ordered to be taken pro confesso, and it turned out that defendant was dead at the date of such order, on application by plaintiff under 15 & 16 Vict., c. 86, s. 42, for appointment of a representative, a supplemental order was made to serve defendant's widow with notice that unless she appeared within six weeks from service of notice, Court would appoint a representative.-Alforth v. Espinach, 36 L.T. 367.

(ccxii.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Charging Order-1 & 2 Vict., c. 110, s. 11; Ord. 46, r. 1.-Where judgment orders defendant to pay a sum certain on a future day plaintiff is entitled to charging order on defendant's property. - Bagnall v. Carlton, 36 L.T. 730.

(ccxiii.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Consolidation—Ord. 55, r. 4.--Court can consolidate actions only at instance of defendants, not of different plaintiffs against the same defendant, but may, with a view to one being tried as a test action, enlarge time in the remaining actions.-Amos v. Chadwick, L.R. 4 Ch. D. 869.

(ccxiv.) C. A.-Costs-Ord. 55.-Where a nonsuit had been set aside and new trial granted, which resulted in judgment for the plaintiff : Held that the costs of the first trial must "follow the event" of the second trial.Creen v. Wright, 46 L.J. C.P. 427; 36 L.T. 355; 25 W.R. 502.

(ccxv.) Q. B. Div.-Costs--Case Stated-Striking Out.-A case having been stated by justices, but the appellant not having complied with requirements of the Act, an application to strike the case out of the paper was granted with costs against the appellants.-Great Northern Committee v. Inett, L.R. 2 Q.B.D. 284; 25 W.R 584.

(ccxvi.) Ex. Div.-Costs-Collision.-Where a defendant in an action for damages from collision of two ships succeeded only on ground of compulsory pilotage: Held that plaintiff was entitled to his costs.-General Steam Navig. Co. v. London and Edinburgh Shipping Co., 36 L.T. 743; 25 W.R. 694.

(ccxvii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Costs-Next Friend.-Where costs are ordered to be paid by a next friend without reservation, the order is final against him personally, and cannot be re-opened on further consideration.—Caley v. Caley, 25 W.R. 528.

(ccxviii.) Q. B. Div.-Costs-Reference.-Where order of reference under Common Law Procedure Act, 1854, was silent as to costs, Court refused application under Ord. 55 for costs on behalf of the party in whose favour the Master decided.-Wimshurst v. Barrow Shipbuilding Co., L.R. 2 Q.B.D. 335; 46 L.J. Q.B. 477; 25 W.R. 557.

(ccxix.) C. A.-Costs-Priority – Citation to Prove Will—Administration.—A company, creditors of testator, cited executrix to prove the will: subsequently R., also a creditor, obtained an order for administration of the estate an order of the Prob. Div. having directed that the company's costs of the citation should be paid in priority to all other claims: Held that notwithstanding the order the costs of the administration must have priority.-Re Mayhew, 25 W.R. 521.

(ccxx.) P. D. A. Div.-Costs-Security-Foreign Defendants.-Foreign defendants intervening in action of collision in rem by foreign plaintiffs, who have given security for costs, must, if they seek relief by counterclaim, give security for whole costs of action.-The Julia Fisher, 25 W.R. 756.

(ccxxi.) C. A.--Costs-Slander.-In action for slander where only one farthing damages were awarded: Held that enactment in 21 Jas. 1, c. 16, was still in force, and that plaintiff was only entitled to one farthing costs.Garnett v. Bradley, 36 L.T. 725; 25 W.R. 653.

(ccxxii.) C. A.-Costs Slander-Ord. 55.-Plaintiff, in action for slander recovered one farthing damages, no order was made as to costs: Held that plaintiff was entitled to one farthing costs only: decision of Q. B. Div. reported 36 L.T. 550 reversed.-Bowey v. Bell, 36 L.T. 640. (ccxxiii.) C. P. Div.-Costs-Witness-Ord. 6, Sched. 2, 8.- The Court allowed expenses of inspection of a building by surveyors, &c., to qualify them to give evidence at the trial.-Mackley v. Chillingworth, 46 L.J. C.P. 484; 36 L.T. 514; 25 W.R. 650.

(ccxxiv.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Default of Appearance-Ord. 13, r. 9.— Where defendant makes default in appearance plaintiff must deliver statement of claim before setting down action on motion for judgment.— Menton v. Metcalfe, 36 L.T. 683.

(ccxxv.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Defence Struck out-Default of Pleading.—In action for removal of a trustee defendant failed to file affidavit of docu. ments his defence was struck out, and order made against him on motion for judgment as in default of pleading.-Fisher v. Hughes, 25 W.R. 528.

(ccxxvi.) C. A.—Discovery.—Defendant obtained an order for discovery of documents: liquidator filed affidavit setting forth certain documents, and

stating he had no other in his possession: defendant applied for a further order on affidavit, stating his belief that the liquidator had further docu. ments in his possession: Held that defendant was not entitled to further order. Welsh Steam Coal ollieries v. Gaskell, 36 L.T. 353.

(ccxxvii.) Ex. Div.-Discovery-Ord. 31, r. 12.—Where Judge in Chambers refused to grant order for discovery without affidavit tracing some documents into defendant's hands, the Court refused to interfere.Johnson v. Smith, 36 L.T. 741; 25 W.R. 539.

(ccxxviii.) C. P. Div.-Discovery -Interrogatories-Ord. 31, r. 1.—Interrogatories will not be allowed after close of pleadings unless the delay is explained.-Ellis v. Ambler, 36 L.T. 410; 25 W.R. 557.

(ccxxix.) C. P. Div.-Discovery-Interrogatory-Objections to Answer.-No appeal will be allowed from order of Judge at Chambers as to sufficiency of any answers to interrogatories which have not been specifically objected to.-Church v. Perry, 36 L.T. 513.

(ccxxx.) C. P. Div. -Discovery-Interrogatories-Objections—Ord. 31, r. 6.— Plaintiff sued defendants as man and wife, and interrogated whether they were married, and also indirectly so as to elicit information on the point the interrogatory as to the marriage was struck out: Held that defendants need not answer the other interrogatories on the point.Smith v. Berg, 36 L.T. 471.

(ccxxxi.) Q. B. Div.-Discovery- Interrogatory—Tendency to Criminate.—In action for libel defendant was interrogated if the words constituting the libel had not been written or circulated by him, or with his knowledge, authority, or consent: Held that the rule heretofore prevalent in equity must prevail, and the interrogatory be struck out.-Atherley v. Harvey, 36 L.T. 551; 25 W.R. 727.

(ccxxxii.) C. A.-Discovery-Privilege-Medical Report.-Where plaintiff in an action for injuries sustained by defendants' negligence was examined under a Judge's order by medical men on behalf of defendants: inspec. tion by plaintiff of their reports was refused.-Friend v. London, Chatham, and Dover Rail. Co., 36 L.T. 729; 25 W.R. 735.

(ccxxxiii.) C. P. Div.-Discovery-Privilege-Surveyor's Report-Ord. 31, 211. -Held, in an action for improper construction of steam tug, that reports of plainti l's surveyors were liable to inspection.-Martin v. Butchard, 36 L.T. 732.

(ccxxxiv.) C. A.-Discovery-Prior Issue-Ord. 31, r. 19.—In an administration action, a horse dealer claimed a sum as due on balance of account, in respect of sale and purchase of horses for testator: the executrix asked for discovery of names of purchasers and prices given by them for horses: Held that evidence was admissible of alleged custom of horse-dealers to act as principals not agents, and that executrix was not entitled to discovery till the question as to the existence of the custom was determined. -Re Leigh, Sherard's Claim, 25 W.R. 783.

(ccxxxv.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-District Registry—Administration Action.— Where in an administration action an order is made for taking accounts and inquiries in a district registry and for sale of real estate, the sale will take place in Chambers unless otherwise specially ordered.McDonald v. Foster, 25 W.R. 602.

(ccxxxvi.) C. A.-On appeal the Court treated the question as one of discretion of the Judge, and allowed his decision to stand.-McDonald v. Foster, 25 W.R. 687.

(ccxxxvii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-District Registry.-Funds apportioned by dis. trict registrar can be paid into Court on an affidavit made subsequent to registrar's report verifying the amounts: costs will not generally be

directed to be taxed by district registrar.-Day v. Whittaker, 36 L.T. 683; 25 W.R. 767.

(ccxxxviii.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Examiner, 15 & 16 Vict., c. 86, s. 31.-An examiner's office is not a public court, and he has no discretion to allow any person to be present except the parties and their counsel, solicitors, or agents.-Re Western of Canada Oii Lands and Works Co., 25 W.R. 787. (ccxxxix.) C. A.-Exception to Record. The Judge directed the jury to find in favour of a will, and ordered an exception to his ruling to be annexed to the record, there being no record: Held that notice of appeal must be given.-Cheese v. Lovejoy, L.R. 2 P.D. 161.

(ccxl.) C. P. Div.—Interlocutory Order—Custody of Property.—In action for return of goods left by plaintiff's agent to defendants who detained them against a debt of agent to them: Court made order, under Ord. 52, r. 3, for delivery of goods to officer of the Court to abide event of action. -Velati v. Braham, 46 L.J. C.P. 415.

(ccxli.) Q. B. Div.-Interpleader-Claimant Barred-Action by Sheriff-A claimant, who has been barred, cannot set up the grounds of his claim in an action by the sheriff for recovery of price of goods on which sheriff had levied, and which he had sold.-Williams v. Richardson, 36 L.T. 505 (ccxlii.) C. A.-Leave to Sign Judgment-Ord. 14, r. 1.-A corporation suing on a specially endorsed writ, cannot obtain leave to sign judgment on affidavit by its secretary.-Bank of Montreal v. Cameron, 46 L.J. Ch. 425; 36 L.T. 415; 25 W.R. 593.

(ccxliii.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.—Motion for Judgment—Ord. 19, r. 6.—Notice of motion for judgment need not be delivered between the parties where defendant has not appeared and the writ has been properly filed.Williams v. Cardwell, 25 W.R. 646.

(ccxliv.) C. A.-Motion for Judgment-Ord. 40, r. 4.-Notice must be given of motion to Court of Appeal to set aside judgment entered at trial before jury and to enter judgment.-Jones v. Davis, 36 L.T. 415.

(ccxlv.) C. A.-Motion for Judgment-Discretion-Ord. 40, r. 11.-In action to enforce an equitable mortgage defendant admitted mortgage but alleged that it was part of agreement that there should be no legal mortgage nor payment of principal or interest for a year from the advance: V. C. H. refused motion of plaintiff for foreclosure order on admissions in defence: Held that C.A. would not interfere with his discretion. Mellor v. Sidebottom, L.R. 5 Ch. 343.

(ccxlvi.) Ex. Div.-New Trial-Fresh Evidence.-New trial will not be granted on discovery of fresh evidence unless there is a reasonable probability that its production would have resulted in a different verdict.Anderson v. Titmas, 36 L.T. 711.

(ccxlvii.) Ex. Div.-New Trial-Time-Ord. 39, r. 6.-Time for application for new trial on ground of misdirection runs from discharge of jury.— Shaw v. Hope, 25 W.R. 729.

(ccxlviii.) C. A.--Parties-Joinder-Ord. 16, r. 3; Ord. 17, r. 1.-Statement of claim alleged that defendants had trespassed on land let to plaintiff by W. defence set up grant of right of way prior to plaintiff's lease: Held that plaintiff was entitled to amend by joining W. as defendant and claiming alternative relief against him for breach of covenant for quiet enjoyment.-Child v. Stenning, 36 L.T. 426; 25 W.R. 519.

(ccxlix.) C. A.-Parties-Joinder-Ord. 16, r. 7.-"Question" means not merely issue but subject-matter of the action: Defendant cannot obtain ex parte order to add third person as defendant.-Horwell v. London General Omnibus Co., 36 L.T. 637; 25 W.R. 512, 610.

(ccl.) C. P. Div.-Parties-Joinder-Ord. 16, rr. 17, 18.—A person added as defendant is not entitled to join as co-defendant a person against whom he has himself a claim.-Walker v. Balfour, 25 W.R. 511. (ccli.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Petition-Service-Official-Solicitor.-Service on official solicitor in cases within Chancery Pay Office list and regulations of 1st February, 1877, may be dispensed with when petitioner's title is clear.-Re Stanhope, 25 W.R. 601.

(cclii.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Pleading-Amendment-Ord. 19, r. 22.-Statement of defence contained general denial of fact consistent with several issues and an allegation raising specifically one issue: Held that such issue was alone open to defendant at trial and leave to amend refused.Byrd v. Nunn, 25 W.R. 749.

(ccliii.) Q. B. Div.-Pleading-Counter-claim.-When defendant makes a counter-claim and joins a third party as defendant thereto, the third party cannot make a counter-claim against defendant so joining him.Street v. Gover, 36 L.T. 766; 25 W.R. 750.

(ccliv.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Pleading-Counter-claim-Ord. 19, rr. 3, 10.—In a pleading containing defence and counter-claim the facts relied on as supporting the counter-claim must be clearly distinguished and specifically stated to be relied on.-Crowe v. Barnicott, 25 W.R. 789.

(cclv.) P. D. A. Div.-Preliminary Acts-Collision-Ord. 19, r. 30.-In action for damage by collision by owners of cargo against owners of ship in which cargo was carried: Held that preliminary acts need not be delivered. The John Boyne, 25 W.R. 756.

(cclvi.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Reference-Inquiry as to Damages. In action for specific performance, inquiry as to damages, necessitating examination of witnesses, was referred to official referce.-Stafford v. Coxon, 25 W.R. 788.

(cclvii.) C. P. Div.-Service of Writ―Jurisdiction. The Court has no juris. diction over acts done by foreigners on high seas below low water mark and cannot order service on foreigner residing abroad of writ in respect of cause of action arising at sea though within the three-mile limit.. Harris v. Owners of Franconia, L.R. 2 C.P.D. 173; 46 L.J. C.P. 363. (cclviii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Service out of Jurisdiction-Company.-Court has jurisdiction to order service of summons under Companies' Act, 1862, ss. 100, 165, upon respondents out of the jurisdiction.--Re British Imperial Corporation, 25 W.R. 583.

(celix.) C. A.-Transfer of Action-Ord. 51, r. 2.-W. gave notice to G. to rescind contract for purchase of land on ground of G.'s delay: G. delivered counter-claim for specific performance: Held that there was a question of equity to be tried, that Chan. Div. alone had machinery for giving relief to G., if successful, and that the action must be transferred to Chan. Div.-Holloway v. York, L.R. 2 Ex. D. 333; 25 W.R. 627.

(cclx.) Ch. Div.-Trial by Jury-Ord. 36, rr. 3, 26.-In an action for a man. datory injunction for removal of an alleged obstruction of plaintiff's lights: Held that defendant was entitled to have issues of fact tried by a jury.-Bordier v. Russell, L.R. 5 Ch. Div. 512; 25 W.R. 801.

(cclxi.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Writ-Indorsement. In creditor's action for administration of intestate's real and personal estate the writ must be endorsed with claim by plaintiff "on behalf of himself and all the other creditors."-Fryer v. Royle, L.R. 5 Ch. D. 540; 36 L.T. 441; 25 W.R. 528. (cclxii.) C. P. Div.-Writ-Interpleader.-Pending hearing of interpleader summons in chambers, plaintiff issued writ of summons and defendant undertook to appear: Held that writ was properly issued.-Hooke v. Ind, 36 L.T. 467.

M