« PreviousContinue »
(xiii.) C. A.-Insurance-Voyage Policy-Deviation.—A policy of marine
assurance was on four pumps from A. to a steamer ashore while engaged at the wreck, and until returned to A.: owing to bad weather the steamer on her return tried to make for B., and in so doing foundered : Held that the assured could not recover.-Wingate v. Foster,
L.R. 3 Q.B.D. 582; 47 L.J. Q.B. 525. (xiv.) C. A.-Limitation of Liability-Gross Tonnage--Foreign Ship-30 & 31
Vict., c. 124.-In an action for limitation of liability by owners of a foreign ship: Held that they were not entitled to make a deduction for space appropriated to crew in estimating the gross tonnage, as the pro. visions of section 9 of Merchant Shipping Act, 1867, had not been com.
plied with.-The Franconia, 39 L.T. 57. (xv.) P. D. A. Div.-Mortgage-Arrest by Mortgagee.—The duly-appointed
managing owner of a ship chartered her for a voyage : the mortgagee of shares in the ship, after she was loaded, took possession of his shares and arrested the ship: on motion by the owners ship was ordered to be
released.— The Maxima, 39 L.T. 112 (ivi.) Ch. Div. V.C. M.-Sale of Share in Ship-Jurisdiction—17 & 18 Vict.,
c. 104, ss. 62.64.-A petition was presented for the sale of shares in a ship to a particular person, the petitioner being sole executor and general legatee of the registered owner, and the application being made within a year but more than four weeks after the transmission of the shares : Held that the Chancery Div. had jurisdiction, and that it was unneces
sary to serve the Crown.-Re The Santon, 26 W.R. 810. Solicitor:(i.) C. P. Div.--Change of Solicitor-Costs-Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25,
sub-s. 11.–The rule at law as well as in equity now is that an order for changing a solicitor shall be made without any provision as to the payment
of the solicitor's costs.-Grant v. Holland, 47 L.J. C.P. 518. (ii.) C. P. Div.-Costs—Charging Order-23 & 24 Vict., c. 127, s. 28.—The
motion for a charging order under 23 & 24 Vict., c. 127, s. 28, must be made before the judge who tried the cause.—Higgs v. Schrader, 26
W.R. 831. (iii.) C. A.-Costs—Lien-Fund Preserved.-When a solicitor defended an
action brought against a trustee of real estate, who was in possession, by a person claiming under a title adverse to trustee and cestui-que trust, he was Held entitled to a lien on the whole of the property preserved.
Bulley v. Bulley, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 479. (iv.) Ch. Div. M.R.-Costs—Taxation-One Transaction.Where solicitors
who were employed in a bankruptcy sent in their bill of costs, down to a certain day before the whole estate was sold, and after the sale of the estate they sent in another bill of costs : Held on summons to tax both bills, that they could not be treated as forming one bill, and that more than six months having elapsed since the delivery of the first bill, could
not be taxed.-Re Hall and Barker, 47 L.J. 621. (v.) Q. B. Div.--Costs—Taxation—6 & 7 Vict., c. 73, ss. 37, 38.—Bank.
raptcy proceedings having been instituted against D., he agreed with the solicitor of his chief creditor to pay him a lump sum for costs, if he would induce his client to allow D. to liquidate by arrangement : After his discharge, D. applied for an order to tax the solicitor's costs: the
order was refused.-Ex parte Docker, Re Heritage, 47 L.J. Q.B. 509. South Africa, Law of:(i.) P. C.-Grant in Erfpacht-Right to Minerals.-Conditio is having been
imposed on the holding of an estate granted on perpetual quit rent and recognised by the Crown, under which the government and the grantee
each took a half of the license monies for defraying the expenses of superintending diamond diggirg on the estate : Held that in the absence of evidence of mistake by its officers, the Crown could not impeach the grantee's title to minerals on the presumption arising from the form of the grant, that it created an emphyteutic tenure.-Webb v. Gidly, L.R.
3 App. 908 ; 38 L.T. 822. Telegraph:(i.) C. A.-Compensation for Loss of Office-Travelling Allowance.--31 &. 32
Vict, c. 110, s. 8.--An officer of a telegraph company whose undertaking has been purchased by the Postmaster-General, under the Telegraph Act, 1868, is entitled to have his profit out of travelling allowance taken into consideration in estimating his "annual emolument under s. 9
and s. ñ of that Act.—Regina v. Postmaster-General, L.R. 3 Q.B.D. 428. Trade Mark: (i.) C. A.-Infringement-Musical Publication.-Defendants were
strained from publishing a work edited by H., under the title of H.'s New Edition of Jousses' Royal Standard Pianoforte Tutor, as a fraudulent imitation of the title of a work of which plaintiffs were proprietors, called H.'s Royal Modern Tutor for the Pianoforte.—Metzler v. Wood,
LR. 8 Ch. D. 606 ; 47 L.J. Ch. 625. (ii.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Infringement --Stamped Bottles.—Where a
trader sells a production in bottles or casks stamped indelibly with his known design, the Court will restrain another trader from selling a similar production in such bottles or casks, though he affix to them a
label of his own.---Rose v. Loftus, 47 L.J. Ch. 576. (iii.) C. A.-Infringement- Wharfinger's Lien.—In an action to restrain in.
fringement of trade mark, a wharfinger who had innocently received goods bearing the pirated mark was made a defendant, and in his defence submitted to act as the Court should direct on receiving his warehouse charges and costs : at the trial his counsel contended that plaintiff ought not to remove the trade marks till his charges were paid : Held that he was entitled to his costs from plaintiff, and had a lien on the goods for warehouse expenses superior to any lien of plaintiff for
costs.-Moet v. Pickering, 38 L.T. 799. (iv.) C. A.—Registration-Distinctiveness.-In the absence of special cir.
cumstances the Court will not interfere with the decision of the Com. mittee of Experts as to whether a cotton trade mark is or is not a trade mark within the Trade Marks Regulation Act, 1875.-Re Orr, Ewing,
& Co.'s Trade Marks, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 794 ; 26 W.R. 777. (v.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Registration-Distinctiveness -- Representative
Registration.--Registration of cotton trade marks refused on the ground that they had been rejected by the Committee of Experts, and repre sentative registration only accorded to others on the ground that the distinctive features only of a trade mark ought to be registered.—Re
Brook's Trade Marks, 26 W.R. 791. (vi.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Trade Name-- Limited Company.-A limited company
having once obtained a registered name has the same rights as to trading under that name as an individual trading under his own name.Merchant Banking Co. v. Merchants' Joint Stock Bank, 26 W.R. 847.
Trustee :(i.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Breach of Trust-Parties-Ord. 7, 7. 2.- Property was
vested in three trustees on trusts, under which the income of £516 was payable to B. for life: one of the trustees paid B. the income during his life, and after his death the interest was paid by one of the trustee's executors with the knowledge of the other trustees, for some years : on
an action to recover the £516 and arrears of interest thereon against the trustee's executors : Held, under the circumstances, that the other
trustees need not be made parties.-Wilson v. Rhodes, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 777. (ii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Breach of Trust-Investment-Liability of Co
Trustee.- Trust to invest in Parliamentary stock or funds, or real secu. rities, with power to sell and invest in any other funds or securities whatsoever: Held that the sale of consols and investment of proceeds in Russian Railway and Egyptian Bonds was authorised, but each of the trustees having retained possession of half of the bonds, and one having committed a breach of trust, the other was held liable.—Lewis v.
Nobbs, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 591; 47 L.J. Ch. 662. (iii.) C. A.-Inrestment—Real Securities.—Under a trnst to invest on
securities," an investment on mortgage of leaseholds is improper.
Jones v. Chennell, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 492; 47 L.J. Ch. 583. (iv.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-- Investment-22 & 23 Vict., c. 35, s. 32–23 S. 24
Vict., c. 38, s. 11.–Trustees of settlements coming within the operation of 23 & 24 Vict., c. 38, may invest in any securities in which cash under the control of the Court may be invested, though forbidden to do so by
the settlement.-Re Wedderburn's Trusts, 47 L.J. Ch. 743; 38 L.T. 904. (v.) H. L.-Power to Postpone Payment- Arrestment by Creditors.-Gift of
residue in trust for testator's children, the shares to vest on testator's death and be payable six months afterwards, with power to the trustees to postpone payment of any shares and apply income for benefit of the children or grandchildren, or to settle the shares for the benefit of such children or grandchildren and their issue as the trustees should consider expedient: the trustees paid to J., a son of testator, the income of his share for five years and part of the capital: judgment creditors of J. used arrestment in the hands of the trustees against the balance of J.'s share : Held that the trustees were entitled to execute a deed restricting the right of J. to a life interest rent and settling the fee on his children, and by another deed to resolve to apply the interest on J.'s behalf as an
alimentary fund.- Chambers v. Smith, L.R. 3 App. 795. University :(i.) C. A.-Religious Test-34 Vict., c. 26–37 &* 38 Vict., c. 55.--A fellow
ship of Hertford College restricted by the indowment to members of certain churches having become vacant, T. not being a member of one of the churches, applied to be examined as a candidate, and the governing body did not refuse to examine him, but told him that he would not in any event be elected : T. did not present himself at the examination and a qualified person was duly elected : Held that a mandamus ought not to issue to compel the college to examine T. and proceed to an election.
Regina v. Hertford College, 39 L.T. 18. Vendor and Purchaser:(i.) Ch. Div. V.C. H.-Conditions of Sale -- Rescission Clause-- Absence
of Title.—A condition that if purchaser shall make any requisition or objection which vendor shall be unwilling to comply with, vendor inay annul the sale, does not enable him to rescind the contract where he fails to show any title - Bowman v. Hyland, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 588; 47 L.J.
Ch. 581; 39 L.T. 90; 26 W.R. 877. (ii.) C. A.-Specific Performance.—Defendant offered to sell to plaintiff
an estate for a certain sum, which plaintiff accepted, subject to the title being approved by his solicitor, and afterwards a verbal arrangement was made that the purchase-money was to be paid by instalments which arrangement never resulted in any binding agreement: Hell that there was originally no binding contract, as the approval of the title by purchaser's solicitors was an additional term not accepted by defendant. -- Hussey v. Payne, L.R. 8 Ch D. 670; 47 L.J. Ch. 751.
(iii.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Specific Performance with Variation.-In an action
by a purchaser for specific performance of a contract to sell, a contract signed by purchaser contained a reservation of mines, but the receipt for deposit was silent as to the reservation : Specific performance decreed with such reservation.-Smith v. Wheatcroft, 47 L.J. Ch. 745 ;
39 L.T. 103. (iv.) C. A.-Statute of Frauds—Acceptance.—Plaintiff verbally sold defendant
six bales of wool which were sent to defendant by rail and unpacked by him, and on same day he wrote to plaintiff that two bales were inferior to sample, adding, “Please say what is to be done in the matter." Plaintiff replied denying that the bales were inferior to sample, and two days afterwards defendant sent back the goods : Held, on action for price of goods that there was no sufficient acceptance by defendant
within s. 17 of Statute of Frauds.-Rickard v. Moore, 38 L.T. 841. (v.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Statute of Frauds-Auction.-At a sale by
auction the auctioneer entered in the sale book the names of the vendor and purchaser, and the property sold, and the amount of the purchasemoney, but made no reference to the conditions of sale : Held no suffi. cient contract in writing within the Statute of Frauds.-Rishton v.
Whatmore, 47 L.J. Ch. 629; 26 W.R. 827. (vi.) C. A.-Statute of Frauds—Conditional Acceptance.—Where an offer
in writing is accepted in writing, the reference in the acceptance to the preparation of a more formal contract does not amount to the ir.troduc.
tion of a new term.- Bonnewell v. Jenkins, 47 L.J. Ch. 758. (vii.) H. L.-Statute of Frauds—Description of Vendor.-M. made a verbal
offer to the agent of vendors of property sold subject to a condition that each purchaser should sign a contract, to purchase certain lots, and the agent afterwards wrote to M. that the proprietors accepted his offer which letter M. acknowledged in writing : Held a binding contract.
Rossiter v. Miller, 26 W.R. 865. Will:(i.) C. A.- Accumulation—39 & 40 Geo. 3, c. 98.—Bequest of fund on trust
on second marriage of testator's widow to pay her an annuity and accumulate surplus income, and after her death the fund and accumula. tions to go to A.: The widow lived for more than twenty-one years after her second marriage : Held that the surplus income after twentyone years was undisposed of.--Weatherall v. Thornburgh, 47 L.J. Ch.
658; 39 L.T. 9. (ii.) C. A.-Annuity-Alienation— Forfeiture-Bankruptcy.—Devise of realty
charged with annuity in favour of A., but if he should do or permit any. thing whereby it should be aliened, then it should cease : A. failed to comply with a 'debtor's summons and was adjudicated bankrupt : Held that the annuity ceased.--Ec parte Eyston, Re Throckmorton, 47 L.J.
Bcy. 62. (iii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Annuity-Deficiency of Income-- Arrears out of
Corpus.--Testator directed his trustees to sell his real and personal estate, and set apart a sufficient portion of the invested proceeds to produce an income of £1,200, which he bequeathed to his wife for life: the income of the whole estate proved insufficient to pay the £1,200: Helu that the widow was not entitled to have the deficiency out of corpus.
Gee v. Mahood, 47 L.J. Ch. 641; 39 L.T. 90; 26 W.R. 789. (iv.) C. A.-Charitable Bequest—Railway Debenture Stock-9 Geo. 2, c. 36,
s. 2.-Railway debenture stock regulated by the Companies Clauses Act, 1863, is not an interest in land within the Mortmain Act.— Attree v. Haue, 26 W.R. 871.
(v.) Ch. Div. V.C.M.-Charitable Bequest-Partnership Property-9 Gen.
2, c. 36.—The proceeds of sale of real estate, part of testator's partner. ship property directed by him to be sold, are an interest in land within
the Mortmain Act.-Ashworth v. Munn, 47 L.J. Ch. 747. (vi.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Codicil — Partial Revocation.-Bequest of
personalty to be laid out in the purchase of land to be settled to the uses in the will declared of testator's D. estates : by a subsequent codicil testator revoked the uses by the will declared of the D. estates, and declared new uses : Held that the codicil did not affect the bequest of
personalty.—Bridges v. Strachan, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 558. (vii.) H. L.-- Construction—Annuity, Arrears—Express Trust-3 & 4 Will. 4,
c. 27, s. 25.-Testator gave an estate to his wife for life, and left all his property real and personal not otherwise specifically devised to trustees upon trust to pay his wife an annuity out of the profits of his business carried on by his sons in trust for his wife and children, and the profits arising from all his estate and property, and after death of wife the estate was to go to the eldest son only on condition of paying the several legacies directed, and discharging with fidelity the different trusts there. in committed to him, and the three sons were made residuary legatees on paying and discharging the different legacies and trusts in the will: Held that there was no exprers trust imposed upon the estate for the payment of the annuity within section 25 of 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27.
Cunningham v. Foot, 38 L.T. 889; 26 W.R. 858. (viii.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Construction—Annuity-Charge on Corpus.
Testator, after bequeathing life annuities, bequeathed his general personal estate to trustees upon trast, out of the income thereof to pay and keep down the annuities, and “subject thereto" on trasts for his children : Held that the annuities were chargeable on the corpus.--Mason v.
Robinson, 47 L.J. Ch. 660. (ix.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.--Construction-Charitable Gift — Uncertainty
Legacy Duty.—Direction to executors to apply to any charitable or benevolent purposes they might agree upon, and at any time the residue of personalty legally applicable to charitable purposes. The executors agreed in writing that the residue should be paid to a certain charitable institution : Held that the gift failed and that the next-of-kin were entitled. Testator gave charitable legacies out of pure personalty and directed the duties on all legacies to be paid out of residue in exoneration of the legacies: Held that the charitable legacies were exonerated only in the proportion which the residue consisted of pure personalty.--Re Jarman's Estate, Leavers v. Clayton, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 584; 47 L.J. Ch. 675; 29 L.T.
89; 26 W.R. 907. (x.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Construction- Charitable Gift-Ewoneration
Banker's Lien.—Testator, after certain specific bequests, gave to a che rity all such parts of his estate as were legally applicable for charitable purposes and not already disposed of exonerating such part of his estate from the payment of debts which he charged exclusively on his residuary estate which he gave in trust to pay debts, including debts secured on devised estates, in exoneration of such estates : the residuary estate being insufficient to pay debts : Held that the legacy of the charity was specific, and must contribute rateably with other specific gifts to the payment of the debts. Testator died indebted to his bankers in a sum secured by mortgage of a devised estate: and having a smaller sum to his credit on current account at the bank: Held that the balance on the current account was included in the charitable gift.-- Halse v. Rumford,
47 L.J. Ch, 559. (xi.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Construction-Codicils—Partial Revocation-- Accelera.
tion.—Testatrix gave a share of residuary real estate devised for sale and personalty to E. for life, remainder to E.'s children: by a codicil