Page images

In an administration action of an insolvent estate, where a claim is made in respect of a contingent liability, which is allowed on a valuation as at date of judgment, and the contingency happens before any certificate has been issued, the creditor may prove for the full amount less 4 per cent. from date of judgment to happening of contingency.-Hill v.

Bridges, L.R. 17 Ch. Ď. 342; 50 L.J. Ch. 470; 44 L.T.730. (xxiv.) C. A.-Proof-Secured Creditor— Judicature Act, 1875, s. 10.-Where

an estate is being administered by the Court, a secured creditor may either realise or value his security; and when he has elected to valoe, he can only prove for the balance, after deducting the valuation from his debts. Where the creditor was required by the chief clerk to valae his security and he did so, he was held to be bound by the course he had adopted. Decision of Fry, J. (44 L.T. 543, 773 ; 29 W.R. 658, 752),

affirmed.-Williams v. Hopkins, 29 W.R. 767. (xxv.) Ch. Div. K. J.-Receiver-Liability to Account-Statute of Limita.

tions.-A receiver in an administration sold stock, part of the estate, in 1870, and received the money for it. He died in 1876 and his final accounts were not passed, nor his recognizance vacated till some time afterwards. In 1880 it was discovered that he had not accounted for the money received for the stock : Held that plaintiff's right to recover this money was not barred by the Statute of Limitations.- Seagram v.

Tuck, 29 W.R. 784. Agreements and Contracts :xxi.) C. A.–Agreement obtained by Fraud-Assignment.--Defendants agreed

to pay T. at the end of six months, £800 in satisfaction of all claims by bim against them, T. assigned this agreement to plaintiffs to whom he was indebted, and notice of the assignment was given to defendants. On an action by plaintiffs to recover the £800: Held that a defence that the agreement was obtained by fraud was a good one.—Wakefield Banking

Co. v. Normanton Local Board, 44 L.T. 697. (xxii.) H. L.-Condition Precedent- Preventing Performance of.—When it is

agreed that something shall be done which cannot be done unless both parties to the contract concur in doing it, it is an implied term in the contract that each party shall do everything on his part necessary to be done towards carrying out the agreement.—Mackay v. Dick, L.R. 6 App.

251; 29 W.R. 541. (xxiii.) C. A.--Covenant not to use as Beer-shop.—The selling beer under an off

licence to sell beer not to be drunk on the premises, is a breach of a covenant not to use the premises as a beer-shop.--London & Suburban

Land Co. v. Field, L.R. 16 Ch. D. 645 ; 44 L.T. 444. (xxiv.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Covenant to Procure Supply of Water-Construction.

-A clause in an agreement by a railway company to purchase land, binding the company to procure as good a supply of water as the supply cut off by their line from the severed lands of the vendor, only binds the company to do once for all what may reasonably be expected to insure a sufficient supply of water. -Re Gray & Metropolitan Rail. Co., 41

L.T. 567. (xxv.) Q. B. Div.-Memorandum in Writing-Statute of Frauds, sec. 4.

Plaintiff signed a memorandum setting forth the terms of a contract by which he agreed to let a carriage to defendant for a term longer than a year; and defendant in a subsequent letter to plaintiff referred to their

agreement for the hire of your carriage : Held a gufficient memorandum in writing to satisfy sec. 4 of Statute of Frauds. -Cave v. Hastings, L.R. 7 Q.B.D. 125.

(xxvi.) C.A.- Representation influencing Conduct-Mutuality-Interest in Lands

-Statute of Frauds, sec. 4.-Decision of Ex. Div. (see Agreements and
Contracts vii., p. 3) reversed.-Alderson v. Maddison, 50 L.J. Ex. 466 ;

29 W.R. 556. (xxvii.) C. A.-Sale of Goods-Delivery by Instalments.-Defendant sold to

plaintiff 2000 tons of iron to be delivered by equal instalments in November, December and January. Plaintiff failed to take delivery of the iron in November : Held that defendant was entitled to repudiate

the contract.-Honck v. Muller, L.R. 7 Q.B.D. 92. Arbitration :(vi.) Q. B. Div.-Agreement to Refer-Stay of Proceedings-Policy of Insur.

ance. -An insurance policy effected with defendant company contained
a condition that all disputes should, if either party required, be referred
to arbitration in manner specified in the company's private Act. By
this Act the Court or a Judge is empowered to order a stay of any pro..
ceedings contrary to the Act. In an action on the policy where the only
issue was whether the death of the assured was caused by accident or
not : Held that the company were, in the absence of any suggestion of
fraud, entitled to a stay of proceedings.—Minifie v. Railway Passengers

Assurance Co., 44 L.T. 552. (vii.) Ch. Div. F.J.-Arbitration Clause—17 & 18 Vict., c. 125, s. 11.-The

Court will not, after delivery of defence, order a reference to arbitration under sec. 11 of C. L. P. Act, 1854.-West London Dairy Society v.

Abbott, 44 L.T. 376; 29 W.R. 584. Australia, Law of:(i.) P. C.-Conflict of Laws-Lex Loci Contractûs-Foreign Corporation.

Held that the Western Australia Joint Stock Companies Ordinance Act, 1858, does not apply to foreign corporations, or to companies incorporated out of Western Australia ; and that a company duly registered and incorporated in Victoria could not be again registered as a company in

Western Australia.--Bateman v. Service, L.R. 6 App. 386 ; 44 L.T. 436. Bank:(i.) Ch. Div. F.J.-Trust Account-Transfer to Private Account-Liability

21 Jac. I., c. 16.-A sum of money was standing in the books of a bank to the credit of the account of the trustees of the late A., and the bank allowed them to transfer sums from this account to their private accounts: Held that the cestuis-que-trust were entitled to recover from the bank these sums, and that the Statute of Limitations would not constitute a valid defence.-Foxton v. Manchester & Liverpool Banking

Co., 44 L.T. 406. Bankruptcy :(lxvii.) C. A.-Action against Bankrupt in Colony-Sequestration-Bank

ruptcy Act, 1869, s. 13. -Before issuing sequestration against real estate of a bankrupt in a colony in order to compel his appearance in an action there to realise a mortgage by the bankrupt of other real estates, the leave of the Bankruptcy Court ought to be obtained. When such seques. tration bad issued without leave, and an appearance had been entered : Held that it was sufficient for plaintiff to undertake not to use the seques. tration for any other purpose.—Ex parte Rogers, Re Boustead, L.R. 16

Ch. D. 665 ; 44 L.T. 357. (lxviii.) C.A.-Act of Bankruptcy-Bill of Sale-Past Debt.- Decision of C. J. B.

(see Bankruptcy xl., p. 78) affirmed.—Ex parte Dann, Re Parker, L.R. 16 Ch. D. 26; 44 L.T. 760; 29 W.R. 771.

(lxix.) C. A.-Allowance to BankruptGift of Furniture-Bill of Sale-Bank

rutpcy Act, 1869, s. 38.-An undischarged bankrupt, to whom his creditors had given a certain part of his furniture, assigned it by bill of sale to plaintiff, and afterwards sent it to defendant, an auctioneer, who sold it and paid the money received to the bankrupt : Held that defendant was liable in an action for conversion.--Brown v. Hickinbotham, 50

L.J. C.P. 426. (lxx.) C. A.-Carrying on Bankrupts Business Bankruptcy Act, 1869, ss. 14,

25.—The creditors of a bankrupt have no power to authorise the trustee to carry on the bankrupt's business, except so far as may be necessary for the beneficial winding-up of the business.-Ex parte Emmanuel, Re

Batey, L.R. 17 Ch. D. 35; 50 L.J. Ch. 305; 29 W.R. 526. (lxxi.) C. A.--Composition-Reduction of Proof- Application by Bankrupt,

Locus Standi.Decision of C. J. B. (see Bankruptcy xlvii., p. 79) affirmed.

-Ex parte Bacon, Re Bond, 29 W.R. 574. (lxxii.) C. J. B.-Debtor's Summons-Service-Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, r.

1, 61.–A debtor's summons may be served by any person authorised by

the creditor.-Ex parte Denman, Re Denman, 29 W.R. 616. (lxxiii.) C. J. B.-Defaulting TrusteeRefusal to Commit—41 & 42 Vict., c. 64.

The Court will refuse to grant a writ of attachment against a defaulting trustee where, owing to the defaulter being without any means, no

aseful object could be gained thereby.-Re Mackenzie, 44 L.T. 618. (lxxiv.) C. J. B.-Elegit-Prior Act of Bankruptcy-Bankruptcy Act, 1869, ss.

87, 95.—The day after an act of bankruptcy had been committed by a debtor, a creditor issued an elegit, under which the sheriff seized the debtor's goods, but no inquisition for appraising them was held. Four days afterwards a petition was presented, and the debtor was adjudicated bankrupt : Held that the goods seized belonged to the trustee

in bankruptcy.--Ex parte Sulger, Re Chinn, 44 L.T. 652; 29 W.R. 808. (lxxv.) C. J. B.-Execution-Sum under £50—Possession Money-Bankruptcy

Act, 1869, s. 87.-Where the receiver in a liquidation has induced the sheriff, by promising to pay extra expenses incurred thereby, not to sell goods seized under a fi. fa. the trustee in the liquidation cannot take advantage of the fact that the debt for which the goods were seized has been thereby raised, by the addition of possession money, to a sum exceeding £50.—Ex parte Ind Coope & Co., Re Bullen, 44 L.T. 587;

29 W.R. 667. (lxxvi.)C. A.– Fraudulent Preference—Decision of C. J. B. (see Bankruptcy

xxxiii., p. 47) affirmed.—E' parte Stubbins, Re Wilkinson, L.R. 17 Ch. D.

58; 29 W.R. 653. (lxxvii.) C. A.-Income of Bankrupt-Voluntary Allowance-Bankruptcy Act,

1869, s. 90.-Decision of C. J. B. (see Bankruptcy lii., p. 80) reversed.

Ex parte Wicks, Re Wicks, L.R. 17 Ch. D. 70; 29 W.R. 525. (lxxviii.) C. A.-Infant Trader—37 & 38 Vict., c. 62.-An infant trader who

has presented a liquidation petition cannot be adjudicated bankrupt on a bankruptcy petition founded on the liquidation petition. Decision of

C. J. B. (44 L.T. 588) reversed.—Ex parte Jones, Re Jones, 29 W.R. 747. (lxxix.) C. J. B.-Liquidation-Appointment of Solicitor-Bankruptcy Act,

1869, s. 29.-The consent of the committee of inspection required by sec. 29 of Bankruptcy Act, to be given to the appointment of a solicitor by trustee, may be given by the members of the committee separately.--Ex parte White & Co., Re Gearing, 29 W.R. 632.

(lxxx.) C. J. B.-Liquidation-Following Trust MoneysIdentification.

Trust moneys cannot be followed unless clearly identified.-Ex parte

Hardcastle, Re Mawson, 44 L.T. 523; 29 W.R. 615. (lxxxi.) C. A.-Liquidation-Prosecution of Debtor and AccomplicesPerson

Aggrieved—32 X 33 Vict., c. 62, s. 16– Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 71.-
Decision of C. J. B. (see Bankruptcy xxxv., p. 48) affirmed.-Ex parte

Evans, Re Orbell, 44 L.T. 762 ; 29 W.R. 573. (lxxxii.) C.A.-ProofJoint and Separate EstateInterest.-A creditor, whose

proof is admitted against both separate estates of two bankrapt partnera, is not entitled to any dividend in respect of interest accrued on his debt after date of adjudication, until the joint creditors have been paid the principal of their debts in full.-Ex parte Findlay, Re Collie, L.R. 17

Ch. D. 334. (lxxxiii.) C. A.--Proof-Part Payment by Surety-Reduction of Proof.Decision

of C. J. B. (see Bankruptcy lxii., p. 81) reversed.-Ec parte National

Provincial Bank, Re Rees, L.R. 17 Ch.D. 98; 44 L T. 325; 29 W.R. 796. (lxxxiv.) C. A.-Re-direction of Bankrupt's LettersBankruptcy Act, 1869,

s. 85.-An application under sec. 85 of Bankruptcy Act for the re-direction by the Postmaster-General of letters addressed to the bankrupt cannot be made by a petitioning creditor, but only by the trustee.-Ev parte

Lister, Re Halberstamm, 29 W.R. 621. (lxxxv.) C. J. B.-Retiring Trustee-Failure to make Report-Committal.

Where a retiring trustee has failed to render an account to the registrar within the time required by rule 126, and having been ordered by the County Court Judge to appear and explain, has failed to appear, he cannot thereupon be committed to prison for contempt.— Re Pookes

Royal, L.R. 7 Q.B.D. 9; 44 L.T. 314. (lxxxvi.) C. A.-Secured Creditor- AttachmentTolzey Court of Bristol

Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 16 (5).-Anattachment of goods of defendantin an action of debt in the Tolzey Court of Bristol does not make plaintiff a secured creditor within sec. 16, sub-sec. 5, of Bankruptcy Act. - Ex parte

Sear, Re Price, L.R. 17 Ch. D. 74. (lxxxvii.) C.A.-Secured Creditor-Garnishee Order.- Decision of C. J. B. (see

Bankruptcy lxv., p. 82) reversed.-Ex parte Pillers, Re Curtoys, 44 L.T.

691 ; 29 W.R. 575. (lxxxvii.) C. A.-Undischarged Bankrupt-Remuneration for Personal Labour

-Action-Adding Plaintif-Ord. 16, r. 19.—The remuneration agreed to be paid to an undischarged bankrupt for his personal services and damages obtained by him for wrongful dismissal will pass to his trustee in bankruptcy. When the bankrupt has brought an action in his own name for such remuneration and damages the Court will add the name of the trustee as co-plaintiff and give him the conduct of the action. Decision of Fry, J. (L.R. 17 Ch. D. 169; 50 L.J. Ch. 492; 44 L.T. 344 ;

29 W.R. 600) affirmed.-Emden v. Carte, 44 L.T. 636. Bill of Sale :(xxi.) Q. B. Div.-Affidavit, Residence of Grantor.-The affidavit filed with a

bill of sale described the grantor as at present residing at 3, W. Street,
Southampton, and having a permanent residence at 9, P. Street, Nine
Elms. The grantor was a travelling circus proprietor, who owned 9, P.
Street, but had not resided there for six years : Held a sufficient de-

scription.—Cooper v. Ibberson, 44 L.T. 309; 29 W.R. 566. (xxii.) C.A.- Attestation-41 | 42 Vict., c. 31, s. 10.—A solicitor, who is the

grantee a bill of sale, cannot be the attesting solicitor of that bill so

as to satisfy sec. 10 of Bills of Sale Act, 1878. -Seal v. Claridge, 50

L.J. Ex. 316; 44 L.T. 501 ; 29 W.R. 598. xxiii.) C. A.-Bankruptcy-Apparent PossessionPossession by Sherif—41

$ 42 Vict., c. 31, s. 8.-If goods comprised in an unregistered bill of sale are, at the time of filing a bankruptcy petition against the grantor, in the actual possession of the sheriff under an execution, they are not in the apparent possession of the grantor, and the Bills of Sale Act does not apply.--Ex parte Saffery, Re Brenner, L.R. 16 Ch. D. 668; 44 L.T.

324; 29 W.R. 749. (xxiv.) C.A.-Consideration–41 & 42 Vict., c. 31, 8. 8.—Decision of C. J. B.

(see Bill of Sale xiv., p. 49) affirmed.-Ex parte Winter, Re Fothergill,

44 L.T. 323; 29 W.R. 575. (Ixv.) C. A.-Consideration–41 8 42 Vict., c. 31, s. 8.—Decision of Q. B. Div.

(see Bill of Sale xix., p. 83) affirmed.-Hamilton v. Chaine, L.R. 7

Q.B.D. 1; 50 L.J. Q.B. 456; 44 L.T. 555, 764; 29 W.R. 676. (xxvi.) C. A.– Conversion Auctioneer. S. took to defendant's reposi.

tory in the City of London certain horses, and entered them for sale there. He afterwards sold them privately there, and defendant took the purchase-money, and, after deducting commission, paid the balance to 8. The horses were included in a bill of sale previonsly granted by S.: Held that defendant was not liable in an action for conversion. National

Mercantile Bank v. Rymill, 44 L.T. 307; 767. (xxvii.).C. J. B.- Registration-Description of Grantor—41 8 42 Vict., c. 31,

s. 10.—The grantor of a bill of sale was therein described as a widow, and no statement was made as to her occupation. She had been a licensed victualler for several years, but had ceased to be so about a month previously: Held that the description was sufficient. -Ex parte

Wolfe, Re Davey, 44 L.T. 321. (xxviii.) C. A. Registration-Execution - Inventory of Goods-Receipt by

Sherif for Purchase Money.-S. bonght goods sold by a sheriff who had seized under a writ of fi. fa., and the sheriff gave him an inventory of the goods and a receipt for the price ; and he left the goods in pos. session of the debtor: Held that the inventory and receipt did not constitute a bill of sale requiring registration within Bills of Sale Act,

1878.- Marsden v. Meadows, L.R. 7 Q.B.D. 80; 29 W.R. 816. (xxix.) C. A.— Registration-Priority. The provisions in sec. 10 of Bills of

Sale Act, 1878, as to the priority of bills of sale, apply to all competing bills of sale in all cases where registration is necessary.—Conelly v. Steer,

50 L.J. Q.B. 327; 29 W.R. 529. (xxx.) Q. B. Div.- Registration-Priority. The provisions in sec. 10 of

Bills of Sale Act, 1878, as to the priority of bills of sale, apply only where there has been a bankruptcy or execution.-Lyons v. Tucker, L.R. 6

Q.B.D. 660; 50 L.J. C.P. 322; 44 L.T. 312. (xxxi.) C. A.-Transfer-Assignment--41 8-42 Vict., c. 31, s. 10.— A bill of sale

of goods, duly registered, was given to secure £500 and interest. Part of this was paid off, and, by a subsequent deed between the parties to the bill of sale and the plaintiff, the security was transferred and the goods assigned to him on his paying off the balance due, and making a further advance to the grantor, making the whole amount secured £501, with interest : Held affirming the Q. B. Div. (50 L.J. Q.B. 403; 44 L.T. 421), that this was a transfer of a bill of sale within sec. 10 of Bills of Sale Act, 1878, and did not require registration.-Horne v. Hughes, L.R. 6 Q.B.D. 676; 44 L.T. 678; 29 W.R. 576.

« PreviousContinue »