« PreviousContinue »
(xci.) C. J. B.——Judgment Debt—Recei1:er—Tacking—1 Q‘ 2 Vict., c. 110; 27 §" 28 Vict., c. 112, s. 1.—The appointment of areceiver in an action bya. judgment creditor in the Chancery Div. is, as regards property which can only be affected in equity, a delivery in execution by virtue of a lawful authority, though no writ of elegit has been issued.-—E:c parte Evans, Re Watkins, 40 L.T. 526; 27 W.R. 712.
(xcii.) C. A.—.T1Lrisdiction.——Where, by the operation of the law of Bankruptcy, the trustee of a bankrupt has a better title against a stranger to the bankruptcy than the bankrupt himself would have had, the question involved is properly within the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Conrt.— Ea: parte Brown, Re Yates, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 14-8 ; 40 L.T. 402; 27 W.R. 651.
(xciii.) C, J, B,-—Liqm'dati0n—Co'ncealmen-t of P1-0perfy—Lea've to Prosecuto.—— The application of the trustee for an order to prosecute the liquidating debtor for fraudulently removing property, ought not to be refused merely because the trustee has already recovered the property.——E';c parts Mmtkhouse, Re Ward, 4-0 L.T. 296.
(xciv.)' C, A.—Liqz1idation—-Descw-iption of Debtor.-—A farmer filed a liquidation petition, in which he described himself as a cattle_dealer: Held, that the description was not misleading so as to invalidate the liquidation res0lutions.—E:z: pa/rte Kirkwood, Re Mason, 40 L.T. 566.
(xcv.) C. J. B.—Liquidation<Proof—Unendorsed Promissory Note.—A bond fide holder for value of promissory notes, which were uuendorsed at date of tender for proof, procured the endorsement before application to register the resolutions: Held that he was entitled to prove for his debt.-—-Em pa/rte Pike, Re Es-lick, 4-0 L.T. 629.
(xcvi.) C. A..——Petit1.'omZng C'redit0'r’s Debt—C'la1'm under Judge's Order.—The defendant in an action on a bill of exchange, having become liable under a judge’s order to pay £29, and in default to have judgment signed against him, tendered the £29, which plaintiff refused, unless defendant also paid another sum of £30, which plaintifi alleged to be due to him. Defendant having refused to pay this, plaintiff issued a debtor‘s summons for £59, and on defendant's failing to give security, presented a bank. ruptcy petition against him: Held that there was no sufiicieut debt to support the petition.—-Er parte Astrup, Re Lefevre, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 303 ; 4-0 L.T. 403; 27 W.R. 518.
(-‘wvll-) C. J. B.——P1'o0_f—-Discounted, Bills—Ba'n.ker’s Lien.—Bankers, with whom bills of exchange have been deposited by a customer for discount, and who have made advances on them, are entitled, on the customer going into liquidation, to retain the bills and prove for the full amount, and receive dividends thereon, giving credit only for sums received from time to time in respect of such bills as may have been paid.—E-.v pa/rte Schofield, Re Frithv, 40 L.T. 464.
(Xcviii-) C. J. B.—Proof—Rejectio1t—Delay.—A trustee does not lose his right to reject a proof by allowing three months to elapse after it is sent in.Ew parte De Boos, Re Shallow, 40 L.T. 659.
(xcix.) C. .A..—Double Proof—Tw.o F1'~rms.—The same individuals were associated in two firms, one in London and the other at Oporto. The (Jporto firm drew bills on the London firm, which the latter accepted, and which were discounted by aPortuguese bank. Both firms having gone into liquidation, the bank received a dividend out of the assets in Portugal : Held that the bank could not prove in the English liquidation without bringing in what they had received from the Portuguese assets.—E.z: parte Banco di Portugal, Re Hooper, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 317 ; 40 L.T. 4-06.
(0-) C. .A.—St0ppage1'n Transi!u.—In a contract to deliver goods free on board, though no destination is mentioned, it is implied that they are
delivered to be carried, and so long as they remain in the hands of the shipmaster as carrier the vendor's right of stoppage in transitu remains. —E'22 parte Rosevear Clay Co., Re Cock, 27 W.R. 691.
Bill of Exchange :—
(vi.) C. A.—-Right to Securities held by Creditor.-—R., a member of a firm of R. and Co., deposited title deeds with the W. Bank as security for the floating balance due from his firm. Afterwards D. sold a cargo to R. and Co. who paid for it by a bill of exchange which D. indorsed and paid into the W. Bank. R. and Co. stopped payment before the bill became due: Held. that D. was not entitled to have the security held by the bank handed over to him on payment of the balance due from R. and Co. to the bauk.—Duncan, For §’ Co. v. North and South Wales Bank, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 88; 48 L.J. Ch. 376; 40 L.T. 371; 27 W.R. 521.
(xiv.) C. .A.—Desc1-iption of Grantor.—The description of the residence and occupation of the grantor of a bill of sale required by sec. 1 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1854, to be filed with the bill of sale, is the description of such residence and occupation at the date of the e.fida.vit.— Button v. O’Nm'll, 48 L.J. C.P. 368; 27 W.R. 592.
(ii.) H. L-t‘-4Tbit'TGtiO7lr—6 55’ 7 Will. IV., c. 32—1O Geo. IV., c. 56, s. 27.—The rules of a benefit building society, enrolled under 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 32, and not re-registered under the Building Societies Act, 1874-, provided that disputes between the society and members should be referred to arbitration : Held that this did not apply where the relation of mortgagor and mortgagee existed.—Mulkem v. Lord, L.R. 4 App. 182; 40 L.'l‘. 594; 27 W.R. 510.
(i.) Ch. Div, M, R,—Power of E:npulsion.—-Duties of C'omm1'ttee.—Injunc. tion granted to restrain the committee of a club from interfering with plaintifi's rights of membership by virtue of a resolution for his suspension which had been passed by the ordinary house-committee instead of a specially summoned committee as provided by the rules, and when the committee had not aiforded plaintiff any opportunity of explaining
"his conduct.—Fisher v. Keane, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 353.
(liii.) C. A.—Action by Sha/reholder—Pa~rties—Fraud.—An action was brought by two shareholders against three directors of a company to set aside a sale by the directors to the promoters, which had been adopted by the company, on the ground of fraud, and alleging that owing to the pre. ponderating influence of defendants, no steps could be taken within the company to remedy those acts: Held, that a demurrer, on the ground that the action ought to have been brought in the name of the company, could not be sustained.——Ma,so-n v. Harris, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 97; 40 L.T. 64-4; 27 W.R. 699.
(liv.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.— Winding--up—Contributory—Insurance Company. -—A life insurance company started a fire insurance business, and issued special shares appropriated to the liabilities of this business ; on being wound up: Held that the liquidators ought to make calls on the past shareholders of the special shares in respect of fire liabilities before calling on the present ordinary shareholders.—Bath’s Case, Re Norwich. Provident Insurance Society, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 386; 48 L.J. Oh. 411; 40
(lV-) H. L.——Winding.up—Contribufory—Fraud by Directors---Repudiating Shares.—An unlimited bank having stopped payment, a. general meeting of the shareholders was summoned and accountants were employed to examine the books and prepare a balance-sheet. The day after their report was issued to the shareholders, A., a shareholder, presented a petition for the removal of his name from the list of contributories on the ground of the fraud of the directors. The next day a voluntary winding-up was resolved upon : Held that A. was too late to repudiate his liability in the winding-up.—Tennent v. City of Glasgow Ba/nk, 40 L.T. 694; 27 W.R. 649.
(lvi.) Ch, Div, F, J',—Winding-up—Conh-ibutor*y—Mutual Insuru/nee Com. pany.—The articles of association of an unlimited insurance company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1862, and having a share capital stated in the Memorandum of Association, provided for two classes of members, each having voting power, viz., shareholders and assurance members being life policy holders with profits. W. signed a proposal for assurance whereby she agreed that she would execute the articles of association when required. She was accepted and paid premiums but was never registered : Held on the winding-up of the company that she must be entered on the list of contributories.—-Winstonés Case, Re Albion Life Assurance Society, 27 W.R. 752.
(lx.) C. A..—Winding.up—Morigage—Foreclosure.~~In the winding-up of a company, in which an inquiry as to securities given by it had been directed, leave was given to a mortgagee who had obtained an order to attend proceedings in the winding.up, his costs of so doing to be costs in the winding-up, to bring such action as he might be advised to enforce his security on his undertaking that his costs of attending the windingup proceedings should be in the discretion of the judge.—Rn HamMIlton’s 'W1'»ndsor Iron Works Co., 40 L.T. 569.
(lxii.) Ch. Div, F. J,—Winding-up -Proof—C'osts of Special Act.—A company's special Act provided that all costs and expenses incident to obtaining the Act should be paid by the company : Held, that a person who had done work towards obtaining the Act as a clerk to a promoter
could not prove for his remuneration in the winding-up.—Re Kent T-ramwa-ys Co., 40 L.T. 393.
(lxiii.) G, A,—Winding-up—Petition-—Paid-up Shaw-eholder.—-A fully paid-up
shareholder who presents awinding-up petition must allege and prove
- that there are assets of such an amount that there would be a
substantial surplus on the winding-up. Vague allegations of fraud are
(lxiv.) Ch, Div, M. B,,—Winding-up—Petitabn—Sec'ured C'redit0r.—Sec. 10 of the J udicatnre Act, 1875, does not affect the right of a. secured creditor to present a winding-up petition, nor will he forfeit the benefit of his security by doing so.—-Moor v. Anglo-Italian Bank, L.R. 1O Ch. D. 681; 40 L.T. 620; 27 W.R. 652.
(lxv.) Ch, Div, M, R,—Winding-1lp—Petitio*n—Mortga41e Bond.—Mortgago bonds were issued by a railway company under the provisions of a deed whereby the company covenanted with trustees to pay them the interest on the bonds : Held, that a bondholder, on default of payment of interest,
was not entitled to demand a winding-up order. —Re Uruguay Central iailway Co., L.R. 11 Ch. D. 372; 27 W.R. 571.
(lxviii.) C, A,—-Winding-up Voluntarily—Ar1'angen1entwith Creditors.—Wheu an honest arrangement has been come to between a company and its creditors, and the transaction is a beneficial one, it is not material in what order the assents required by thc Companies Act, 1862, and the Joint Stock Companies Act, 1870, are given.——Re Dynevor Daflryn, §r‘c., Collieries Co., 48 L.J. Ch. 814; 40L.'1‘. 409; 27 W.R. 670.
(lxix.) C.A.—Win¢ling-up Volunta.1'ily—C0mpuls0ry Ordcr.——The Court has no jurisdiction to make an order for winding.up a company which has been voluntarily Wound up and dissolved, unless the dissolution can be
impeached on the ground of fraud.—Re London and Caledonian Ma/rine Insurance Co., L.R. 11 Ch. D. 140; 4-O L.T. 666; 27 W.R. 713.
(v.) Ch, Div, V, C, B,—Infringement—Tille of Book.——Plaintifi was in the habit of publishing directories, which he called Post Ofiice directories, and was the registered proprietor of the “Post Ofiice Directory of the West Riding of Yorkshire ” : Held, that the publication of a directory by defendant, called the “ Post Office Bradford Directory," was not an in
fringement of the copyright, nor of his trade-mark in the words “ Post Oflice.”——Kelly v. Byles, 40 L.T. 623.
made at the time of the adjudication there0n.——L0ndon School Board v. Harvey, 27 W.R. 783.
c. 7 5, s. 74.—A school board is not entitled to enforce the provisions of its bye.laws with regard to the hours of attendance at school, in the case of children employed in factories, who are attending eificient elementary schools, pursuant to the Factory Acts.-—Mell0r v. Denham, L.R. 4 Q.B.D. Ztl ; 48 L.J. M.G, 113; 40 L.T. 395; 27 W.R. 505. '
police-constable, obtained an illegal warrant against S. for assaulting him, and arrested him thereon, and took him before magistrates in Petty Sessions, when S. was convicted: Held that II. might properly be con. victed for perjury in respect of evidence given at the hearing at Sessions. —Regina v. Hughes, 40 L.T. 685.
brought an action against defendants for a penalty under 21 Geo. 1II., c. 4-9, for keeping open a place of amusement on Sunday, August 15th : subsequently, by arrangement, B. brought an action for penalties in respect of that and subsequent Sundays, and obtained judgment by default, having agreed not to enforce the judgment: Held that lt.‘s judg. ment could not affect the right of plaiutiiI.—Girdlesto'm2 v. Brighton Aquarium Co., L.R. 4 Ex. D. 1.07 ; 48 L.J. Ex. 373 ; 40 L.T. 473 ; 27 W.R. 523.
s. 1.—A foreigner, a member of a firm carrying on business abroad, came to England to try and make arrangements with creditors of the firm, and such arrangements proving abortive, he was about to return home : Held that he was not liable to arrest as an absoonding debt0r.—E:u pa/rte Gutierrez, Re Gutierrez, L.R. 11 Ch.D. 298; 40 L.T. 355; 27 W.R. 497.
holders.—Money due from the D. Railway Co. to the S. Railway Co., but payable as dividend by the latter (under an arrangement confirmed by Act of Parliament) to preference shareholders, who took their shares on the security of their dividends being so provided for, is attachable by a judgment creditor of the S. Company in the hands of the D. Company. —Brmch v. Serevwaks and llfaidsf-one Rail. Co., L.R. 4 Ex.D. 133; 48 L.J.