« PreviousContinue »
remained closed till 28th July: Held that defendants could not repudiate the contract, but must accept undelivered coal. -King v. Parker, 34
L.T. 887. (ix.) Contract of Sale-Unpaid Vendor-Lien-Estoppel.-Defendants sold goods
to B. & Co., and delivered to them a written undertaking to deliver the same to order. B. & Co. sold to plaintiffs and received tho price, and afterwards failed: Held that the undertaking did not estop defendants from setting up their lien as unpaid vendors.-Farmiloe v. Bain, L.R. 1,
C.P.D. 445 ; 45 L.J, C.P. 264; 34 L.T. 324. (x.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Rescission.—An Actress having been engaged by
defendants to perform in a new Opera, was unable through illness to perform on the opening or earlier nights, whereby the manager was obliged to engage another actress to take the part : Held that the failure of consideration justified defendants in rescinding the contract.-Poussard v. Spiers, L.R. 1, Q.B.D. 410 ; 45 L.J. Q.B. 621 ; 34 L.T. 573;
24 W.R. 819. (xi.) C. A.-Specific Performance. -Defendant verbally agreed to purchase a
horse, his solicitor next day wrote a letter stating terms of arrangement, enclosing draft contract for perusal: Held that the solicitor's letter was not a memorandum of agreement under Statute of Frauds, and that specific performance could not be decreed.-Smith v. Webster, L.R. 3,
Ch. D. 49; 45 L.J. Oh. 430; 35 L.T. 44 ; 24 W.R. 894. (sii,) C. A.-Specific performance.-Where demurrer to bill for specific perform
ance on ground that agreement is invalid under Statute of Frauds, bas been overruled, the defence of the Statute, only raised by demurrer, may be relied on.-Johnasser v. Bonhote, L.R. 2, Ch. D. 298 ; 45 L.J. Ch. 651;
34 L.T. 745 ; 24 W.R. 619. Arbitration:(i.) Q. B. Div.-Submission.-Held that Common Law Procedure Act, 1854, 8.
11, does not affect right of either party to revoke submission not made rule of Court.-Randall v. Thompson, 45 L.J. Q.B. 713 ; 33 L.T. 199 ; 24
W.R. 665. Banker :(i.) Ex. Diy.-Cheque.-A cheque crossed L. & C. Bank drawn by plaintiff on
W. & Co. bis baukers, was stolen and paid with forged indorsement to defendant by a customer: defendant presented the cheque through bankers other than the L. & C. Bank to W. & Co., who paid it; the jury found that all parties except defendant had acted negligently. Held that defendant was liable to plaintiff for amount of the cheque.--- Bobbett v.
Pinkett. L.R. 1 Ex. D. 368; 45 L.J. Ex. 555 ; 34 L.T. 851; 24 W.R. 711. (ii.) C. P. Div.-Cheque.- Held that a signature “S. & Co. per 8.K. agent"
endorsed on a cheque payable to S. & Co., was a signature" per procurationem," and that bankers paying such cheque were protected by 16 & 17 Vict. c. 59, 8. 19.-Charles v. Blackwell, L.R. 1 C.P.D. 648 ; 45 L.J. C.P.
542; 35 L.T. 162; 24 W.R. 737. (ii.) H. L.-Cheque.-M. on 11th of February purchased of L. foreign bills at
15 days' date, which, by custom of the trade were payable on the 14th of February; L. being indebted to plaintiffs, his bankers, gave them & stamped paper dated 14th of February requesting M. to pay to them the price of the bills, and M.'s agent accordingly handed to them a cheque for the amount, but, L, having stopped payment that day, he directed his bunkers pot to pay the cheque; the bills were dishonoured. Held that the bills notwithstanding their subsequent dishonour were a good consideration for the cheque, and that plaintiffs had a lien thereon for L.'s
antecedent debt.- Misa v. Currie, 24 W.R. 1049. (iv.) C. P. Div.-Draft-Forged endorsement.-A draft specially endorsed was stolen and presented with forged endorsement at bauk of defendants who procured the money for the presentor: Held that defendants were not protected by 16 & 17 Vict. c. 59, 8. 19, from liability to account to the last rightful holder of the draft.-- Arnold v. Cheque Bank, Arnold v. City
Bank, L.R. 1, C.P.D. 578; 45 L.J. C.P. 562; 34 L.T. 729 ; 24 W.R. 759. Bankruptcy :(i.) C. J. B.- Act of Bankruptcy.--A. gave B. a bill of sale over all his property
to secure a past debt, and also a further advance to enable A. to meet a bill to which he had forged B's. name : B. sold the property under the bill of sale, and A. was subsequently adjudicated bankrupt : Held that the bill of sale being given to compound a felony was absolutely void and an act
of baukruptcy.--Ex parte Caldecott, Re Mapleback, 35 L.T. 172. (ii.) C. A.--Act of bankruptcy- Bill of sale.-Trader agreed with his brother to
execute bill of sale to secure past debt and further advance of £150 ; three advances of £50 were made at intervals and on last advance the bill of sale was executed; the brother subsequently made a further advance of £100 and a month later a creditor presented a petition for adjudication on the ground that the bill of sale was an act of bankruptcy: Hela that the execution of the bill of sale was not an act of bankruptcy.-Ex parte King, Re King, L.R. 2, Ch. D. 256 ; 45 L.J. Bptcy. 109; 34 L.T. 466; 24
W.R. 559. (iii.) C. A.- Act of Bankruptcy--Notioe.-A creditor who receives notice of
debtor's intention to commit act of bankruptcy is not bound to inquire whether such act has been committed, but may avail himself of his remedies notwithstanding such notice.--Ex parte Arnold, Re Wright, L.R.
3, Ch. D. 70; 45 L.J. Bptcy. 130; 35 L.T. 21; 24 W.R. 977. (iv.) C. A.- Adjudication.-- Where adjudication of bankruptcy was made, the
alleged act of bankruptcy being the execution of a bill of sale, Held that the holder of the bill was entitled to appeal from the adjudication. Ex .
parte Ellis, re Ellis, L.R. 2 Oh. D, 797; 34 L.T. 705. (v.) C. J. B.-Adjudioation.-Debtor's solicitor by mistake omitted to give
notice of intention to dispute debt, but at the hearing applied for leave to do so, and for adjournment; cornty court judge refused and adjudicated .the debtor bankrupt: Held that adjudication must be annulled.- Ex
parte Dale, Re Dale, 45 L.J. Bpcy. 129 ; 34 L.T. 745 ; 24 W.R. 852. (vi) C. J. B.-Attachment.--The Court will in no case dispense with the three
days' notice of an application to commit required by Bankruptoy Rules, 1870,
r. 179.-Re Bryant, 35 L.T. 173. (vii.) C. J. B.-Bill of Sale- Trustee in liquidation.-Debtor, by unregistered
bill of sale, assigned all his property to A. ; by a subsequent registered bill of sale he assigned it to B. and then filed a petition for liquidation: Held that after the petition A's security was gone, and B, having a good bill of sale, was entitled against the trustee.- Ex parte Cochrane, Re
Barraud.—-45 L.J. Bpcy. 122 ; 34 L.T. 95). (viii.) C. A.-Bill of Sale-- Trustee in liquidation. -A. assigned furniture, by un
registered bill of sale; default having been made, creditor demanded the furniture and threatened to take it by force from the owner of a house where A. bad placed it. A., however, did not deliver up the goods uutil she filed a petition for liquidation: Held that the goods were in possession of A, within 17 & 18 Vict. c. 36, and that the trustee in liquidation was entitled.- Ancona v. Rogers, L.R. 1 Ex. D. 285; 35 L.T. 115 ; 24 W.R
1000. (ix.) C. J. B.-Composition, Costs.—The Court of Bavkruptcy has jurisdiction to
order taxation of costs in composition cases.- La parte Shepherd, Re Dizon,
24 W.R. 931. (s.) O. P. Diy.-Composition - Debtors' Statement.--Under Bankruptcy Act
1869. g. 126, Oreditors assenting to Composition are bound, though their names, &c., are not inserted in debtor's statement; also, where a sum
sufficient to satisfy the composition has been paid to the trustees no directions of the debtor with regard to it are valid, nor will non-payment by trustee of assenting creditors' composition in consequence of such directions entitle the creditor to sue the debtor.- Campbell v. Im Thurn,
L.R. 1, C.P.D. 267; L.J. 45, C.P. 482 ; 35 L.T. 265; 24 W.R. 675. (xi.) C. J. B.—Composition Judgment Creditor.-Notice of application for an
injuction to restrain a judgment creditor is properly served when sent by post. -Ex parte Manthner, Re Lewis, L.R. 3, Ch.D. 113; 45 L.J. Bpcy. 125 ;
34 L.T. 662. (xii.) C. J. B.-Composition-Proof.-W. supplied C. with ale on terms of
monthly cash payments and 20 per cent, discount; 0. made monthly payments by acceptances which were dishonoured, and then filed petition, under which resolutions for composition were passed : Held that W. was entitled to prove for the full amount without deducting discount.--Ex
parte Worthington, Re Cumberland, 45 L.J. Bpcy. 135; 34 L.T. 951. (xiii.) C. A.-Composition - Registration of Resolutions. The power of a majority
of creditors to accept a composition under Bankruptcy Act 1869, s. 126, must be exercised bonâ ade only for benefit of the creditors, and registrar rightly refused to register a resolution to accept ls. in the pound where the debtor's assets could have produced 58.--Ex parte Page, L.R 2,
2 Oh. D. 214; 45 L.J. Bpcy. 119; 34 L.T. 638; 24 W.R. 502. (xiy.) C. J. B.-Costs.-Petition for adjudication having been adjourned at
debtor's request, the creditors resolved on liquidation by arrangement:
L.R. 1, Ch. D. 806. (xvi.) C. A.-Debtor's Summons - Service.- Where a creditor employed a London
solicitor, service of a debtor's summons by the clerk of his country ageut was held good.- Ex parte Lancaster, Re Lancaster, 34 L.T. 951;
24 W.R. 1010. (xvii.) C. A.-Injunction-Third party Order.-Goods were delivered to C. & Co.,
who, before payment, became bankrupt : vendors commenced action against S. & Co. as having authorised the purchase either on joint account or as undisclosed principals: S. & Co. served notice under Judicature Act, 1875, Ord. 16, r. 18, on the trustee that tbey claimed to be indemnified : Held that the Court of Bankruptcy had no power to restrain the proceed. ings under Ord. 16 by injunction.--Ec parte Smith, In Re Collie, 45
L.J. 1, Bpcy. 118. (xviii.) C. J. B.-Lin— Agent.--A., a timber merchant at S., agreed with
F. & Co. that they should carry on his business under his name, and consign timber to him for sale. A. was to manage the business, and receive part of the profits, both A. and F. & Co. having gone into liqaidation: Held that the trustee of A.'s estate was entitled as against the trusteo of F. & Co.'s estate to timber of F. & Co. in possession of A. at
commencement of liquidation.--Ex parte Buck, Re Pawcus, 34 L.T. 807. (xix.) C. A.-Lien-Banker.---By Articles of Association it was provided that
shares in a bank should be subject to lien for debts due from the holders, and that noue but registered holders should be recognised as owners ; at the time of the bankruptcy of a firin, one of the partners who was indebted to the bank was the registered holder of shares, which were, in fact, partnership properly: Held that the bank could not prove against the joint estate without deducting the value of the shares.-Ex parte the
Manchester and County Bank, In Re Collie.-35 L.T. 23; 24 W.R. 1035. (xx.) C. A. Lien, Packer.-A packer by custom of the trade has a general lien
on all goods of customer for all moneys due from that customer. Ex parte Shubrook, Re Witt, L.R. 2, Ch, D. 489; 45 L.J. Bpcy, 118;
34 L.T. 785. (axi.) C. J. B.-Lien-Solicitor.- A solicitor acted for mortgagor and mortgagee,
having at the time a lien on the mortgagor's de ods, which, on completion of the mortgage, he continued to hold : mortgagor having filed a petition for liquidation, the same solicitor acted for the trustee : on sale of equity of redemption of the property, Held that the solicitor had a lien on the deuds.-Ex parte Calvert. Re Messenger, 45 L.J. Bpcy. 134; 34
L.T. 920. (xxii.) C. J. B.-Liquidation-Arbitration.-Where in a liquidation there is &
reference to arbitration, County Court Judge has jurisdiction under Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, r. 166, to compel by subpoena the attendance of witnesses before the arbitrator.--Ex parte Bolland. Re Ackary, L.R. 3,
Ch. D. 125 ; 45 L.J. Bpcy. 133; 34 L.T. 666; 21 W.R. 932. (xxiii.) C. J. B.-Liquidation-Examination.---When debtor has made his state
ment, and been examined at a creditor's meeting, some default by him must be proved before he can be compelled to give further information under R. 301.-E.c parte Glave. Re Bennett, 45 L.J. Bpcy. 126; 34
L.T. 949. (xxiv.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Liquidation-Joint and Scparate Estate-Vendors
and Purchasers Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vic. c. 78), 8. 9. -Joint creditors of two partners resolved on liquidation, and appointed A. and B. trustees; separate creditors of each partner also appointed A. and B. trustees of the separate property ; B. resigned, and the joint creditors appointed A. sole trustee in the liquidation: Held that the legal estate in the separate property was vested in A., 80 that he could make a good title thereto to a purchaser.
Ex parte Waddell, 45 L.J. Ch. 647; 34 L.T. 237. (IXV.) C. J. B.-Liquidation-Judgment Creditor,-A judgment creditor de
livered a writ of fi. fa. to the sheriff before debtor filed a liquidation petition: the creditors, including the judgment creditor, accepted a composition: after registration of the resolutions the sheriff seized under the writ: Held that the writ could not be enforced. - Ex parte Balbirnie, Re
Balbirnie, 34 L.T. 857. (xxvi.) C. A.-Liquidation - Registration of resolutions.-Held that after passing
of a special resolution for liquidation the registrar has no power to enquire into accuracy of debtor's statement of his affairs ; if fraud is alleged a distinct application must be made to vacate registration.-Ex parte Walter, Re Webb, L.R. 2, Ch. D. 326; 45 L.J. Bpcy. 105; 34 L.T. 701 ; 24 W.R.
834. (xxvii.) C. J. B.-Liquidation - Registration of resolutions.-Creditors of debtor
who had filed liquidation petition passed resolutions in form for liquida. tion, but in substance for Composition : a creditor not included in debtor's statement, and without notice of proceedings, commenced action against debtor for value of goods delivered by him to debtor for sale on commission: Held that the resolutions ought not to have been registered, and that the action could not be restrained.--Er parte Harold, In re Meade,
L.R, 3, Ch. D. 119; 45 L.J. Bpcy. 121; 34 L.T. 663. (xxviii.) C. J. B.-Liquidation-Trustee.-Where in liquidation trustee had under
taken, on appointment, to make good to Estate what should be found due from the late trustee: Held that on default the Court had no jurisdiction to order his committal under Debtors Act 1869.— Ex paite Cud tifora, Re Hincks, 45 L.J. Bpoy. 127 ; 34 L.T. 666; 24 W.R. 931.
(xxix.) C. J. B.---Liquidation --Trustee.-Undischarged liquidating debtor en
gaged in trade and gools were sent to him by mistake, in belief that they were for a firm whose name resembled that of debtor. Held that trustee must return the goods to the vendor.-Ex parte Barnett, Re Reade, L.R. 3
Oh. D. 123 ; 45 L.J. Bpcy. 120. (ixx.) C. A.-Liquidation-Trustee--Disclaimer.-Trustee in liquidation received
notice to disclaim lease within 28 days; on the day before the expiration of the 28 days he received letter from legsor asking for reply to previous notice “at his earliest convenience." Held that lessor had waived his right to insist on disclaimer within the 28 days and granted to the trustee an extension of time.-Ex parte Moore, Re Stokoe, L.R. 2 Ch. D. 802; 24
W.R. 720. (xxxi.) C. J. B.-Liquidation-Trustee - Disclaimer.— Trustees after notice to
decide as to disclaimer, continued debtor's contracts for two years and then refused to continue them further. Held that persons aggrieved must prova for damages in the liquidation, and might be restrained by injunction from bringing actions against the trustees.-Ex parte Davis and
Sons, Re Sneezum, 34 L.T. 805. (xxxii.) C. A.–Prosecution.-An application for prosecution of a fraudulent
debtor under Debtor's Act, 1869, s. 16, should be made ex parte, and the debtor has no right to be present or to appeal.-Ex parte Marsden, In re
Marsden, L.R. 2 Ch. D. 786 ; 34 L.T. 700 ; 24 W.R. 714. (xxxiii.) C. A.-Prosecution.-An order was made for prosecution of a debtor
and also of a third party as accomplice. Held that such accomplice was not “ aggrieved" within Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and had no right to appeal.- Ex parte Brown, Ke Appleby, L.R. 2 Ch. D. 799; 45 L.J. Bpoy.
115 ; 35 L.T. 10; 24 W.R. 750. (xxxiv.) C. A.-Trustee-Disclaimer.-There is no appeal from order granting
leave to disclaim after disclaimer, a person opposing the disclaimer should apply at once for stay of proceedings pending his appeal.-Ex parte Ditton,
Re Woods, 24 W.R. 1008. (XXXV.) C. J. B.-Trustee-Release. The release of a trustee does not operate
till all his duties have been performed, and the court has jurisdiction to compel the performance of such duties.-Ex parte Societè Cockrill, Re
Proger. L.R. 3; Ch.D. 115 ; 45 L.J. Bpcy. 124; 34 L.T. 660. (2xvi.) C. J. B.-Trustee Removal.-Creditors of bankrupt removed a trustee
but voted him remuneration. Held that the court had power to disallow the remuneration.-Ex parte Simmons, Re Lister.-L.R 2 Ch.D. 749; 45
L.J. Bpcy. 113; 34 L.T. 744. (Xxxvii.) C. J. B. Doluntary Settlement.-A non-trader in 1858, being then
solvent, settled property on his wife and children ; in 1873 he engaged in trade, and in 1875 became bankrnpt. Held that the settlement was void
under 13 Eliz. c. 5.-Rx parte Stephens, Re Pearson, 35 L.T. 68. Bill of Exchange :(i.) C. A.- Acceptance on behalf of Company. A bill drawn on a Company
was accepted by O. and M. as directors of the Company; directors were authorised to accept bills. Held that the acceptance complied with requirements of Companies' Act, 1862, s. 47, and bound the Company.
Okell v. Charles, 34 L.T. 822. (ii.) Ex. Div.-Principal and Agent.- A bill directed to C., General Agent
of the U. Company, was accepted by him “ on behalf of the Company :"
Held that O. was personally liable.-Herald v. Connah, 34 L.T. 885. Bill of Sale :(i.) C. P. Div.-Growing Crops.-A document of transfer of goods drawn ap as
evidence of a previous parol agreement is within the Bill of Sale Act, but