« PreviousContinue »
C, A,-—Insurance—Vo'yage Policy—Dem'ation.—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 tc bad weather the steamer on her return tried to make for B., and in so doing
C. A..—Limitation of Lialn'li'ly—G1'oss 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 provisions of section 9 of Merchant Shipping Act, 1867, had not been com. plied with.—The Franconia, 39 L.T. 57.
P. D. A. DiV.—Mortgage—A1~rest bu M01-tgagee.—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 Maximum, 89 L.T. 112
r-. 10-1-, 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 unnecessary tc serve the Crown.-—-Re The Santon, 26 W.R. 810.
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.
C. .A..—C'osts—Lim1—Fu.-nd Preseq-1'ed.—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, each took a half of the license monies for defraying the expenses of superintenrling diamond digging on the estate : Held that in the absence of evidence of mistake by its oflicers, the Crown could not impeach the grantee’s title to minerals on the presumption arising from the form of
he was Held entitled to a lien on the whole of the property preserved.— Bulley v. Bulley, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 4.-79.
(iv.) Ch. Div. M. R,—Oosts—Ta.ration—One Transa.cti0n.—Where solicitors
(v.) Q. B. DiV.—Costs—Ta.wa,t1'on-6 Q‘
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, it could not be taxed.—Re Hall and Barker, 47 L.J. 621.
7 Vict., c. 73, ss. 87, 88.—Ba.nkruptcy 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 so1icitor’s costs: tho
order was refused.—Ez parts Docker, Re Heritage, 47 L.J. Q.B. 509.
South Africa, Law of:—
P. C.—Gran! 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
Vict., c. 110, s. 8.—An oificer 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. 7 of that Act.-—Regi'na v. Postmaster-Genera,l, L.R. 8 Q.B.D. 4.-28.
Ch, Div, V, C, M,—I11_fr"i1zge1nent-»-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 aflix to them a
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 plaintifi ought not to remove the trade marks till his charges were paid : Held that he was entitled to his costs from plaintifi, and had a lien on the goods for warehouse expenses superior to any lien of plaintifi for costs.——Moet v. Pickering, 38 L.T. 799.
C. A.—Reg'istrati0n—Distinctiveness.——l11 the absence of special circumstances the Court will not interfere with the decision of the Committee of Experts as to whether a cotton trade mark is or is not a trade mark within the Trade Marks Regulation Act, 1875.—R4a Orr, Ewing, Q‘ Oo.’s Trade Marks, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 794 ; 26 W.R. 777.
Ch, Div, V. C, H_—Registration—Distinctiveness-Representative Regist-ration.—Registration of cotton trade marks refused on the ground that they had been rejected by the Committee of Experts, and repre sentative rep_'istration 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.
Ch. DiV. M. R.—T1'ade Na.m-e-—Limited C'omp<my.—-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 Ba/nking Co. v. Merchants’ Joint Stock Bank, 26 W.R. 847.
Ch. DiV. F. J.—-—B'reach of Trust~—-Parties— Ord. 7, <2‘. 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.~—ll'ils0n v. Rhodes, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 777.
Ch. DiV. V, C, H,—B/reach of Trust“—Inoestme1tt—-Liability of OoTmstee.—'l‘rust to invest in Parliamentary stock or funds, or real seou. rities, with power to sell and invest in any other funds or securities whatsoever: Held that the sale of conscls 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; 4-7 L.J. Ch. 662.
C, A,—Investment—Rea,l Seem-ities.—Under a trust to invest on “ real
securities," an investment on mortgage of leaseholds is improper.Jones v. Chennell, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 492; 47 L.J. Ch. 583.
H. L.—-Power lo Postpone Payment-—~A1-restment by Credit0rs.—-Gift of residue in trust for testatcr'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 fnnd.— Chambers v. Smith, L.R. 3 App. 795.
C, A,—-—Religious Test—34 Vict., c. 26-87 1}‘ 88 Vict., c. 55.—-A fellowship of Llertford 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 '1‘. and proceed to an election.Regina v. Hertford College, 39 L.T. 18.
Vendor and Purchaser :
Ch. DiV. V. C. H.—Cmuiz'tio'ns of Sale—Resc1'ssio-n Clause-——Absence of Title.—A condition that if purchaser shall make any requisition or objection which vendor shall be unwilling to comply with, vendor may annul the sale, does not enable him to rescind the contract whore he fails to show any title —Bowman v. Hyla/nd, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 588; 47 L.J. Ch. 581; 39 L.T. 90; 26 W.R. 877.
C. A.—Sper1'jic Perfoo-mance.—Defendn-nt offered to sell to plaintifi an estate for a certain sum, which plaintifi 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: Held 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. —llw;Rey v. 1’a1_,'ne, L.R. 8 Ch D. 670; 47 L.J. Ch. 751.
(iii.) Ch. DiV. F. J.—Specijic 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.
C. A.—Statu-ie 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 nlaintifi that two bales were inferior to sample, adding, “ Please say what is to be done in the mutter." 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 sufiicieut acceptance by defendant within s. 17 of Statute of Frauds.—Rickard v. Moore, 38 L.T. 841.
Ch, Div, V, C_ H_—Siai-ufe 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 sufiicient contract in writing within the Statute of Frauds.—Rishton v. Whatmore, 47 L.J. Ch. 629; 26 W.R. 827.
C. A.—SIal-ute of F1'auds—Oonditi0nal. 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 introduction of a new term.—Bo-n-newell V. Jenkins, 4-7 L.J. Ch. 758.
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 ofier which letter M. acknowledged in writing Held a binding oontract.— Rossiter v. Miller, 26 W.R. 865.
C. A.—Accumulatio»n—89 &' 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 accumulations 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 uudisposed of.—Wea.the1-all v. Thornburgh, 47 L.J. Ch. 658; 39 L.T. 9.
Ch. Div, V. C, H,—An'nui!'y—Deficiency of I'ncome~—Ar'rears out of L'o'rpus."——Testator directed his trustees to sell his real and personal estate, and set apart a sufiicient portion of the invested proceeds to produce au income of £1,200, which he bequeathed to his wife for life: the income of the whole estate proved insufiicient to pay the £1,200 : Held. 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.
Act, 1863, is not an interest in land within the Mortmain Act.—Att1-so v.
(viii.) Ch. Div.
2, 1:. 3fi.—The proceeds of sale of real estate, part of testator's partnership property directed by him to be sold, are an interest in land within the Mortmain Act.——-Ashworfh v. Munn, 47 L.J. Ch. 747.
Ch. DiV. V. C. M.——C0diciZ— Partial Rm-ocnti0n.—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 afiect the bequest of personalty.—Bridg0s v. Sh-arhan, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 558.
H. L.—— Cons!-rurfion—Annuity— Arrears—E.'vpress T-r*ust—3 §‘ 4- lVill. 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 therein committed to him, and the three sons were made rcsiduary legatees on paying and discharging the different legacies and trusts in the will : Held that there was no express 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. B89; 26 W.R. 858.
M. R.—-C0nslru.ction—Annuity—(lharge on Corpus.— Testntor, after bequeathing life annuities, bequeathed his general personal estate to trustees upon trust, out of the income thereof to pay and keep down the annuities, and “ subject thereto " on trusts for his children : Held that the annuities were chargeable on the oorpus.—Muson v. Robinson, 4-7 L.J. Ch. 660.
Ch. DiV. V. C. H.—Constrnci.ion-——Ohariiable G'ift— U-ncm-ta.inty— Legacy Duty.—Direction to executors to apply to any charitable or benevoleut purposes they might agree upon, and at any lime 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 Jarma/n’s Estate, Leavers v. Clayton, L.R. 8 Ch. D. 584; 47 L.J. Ch. 675; 39 L.T. 89; 26 W.R. 907.
Ch. Div. V, C, H,—Construction/— Chn/ritable Gift~Ea:onera<fion—Banker's Lien.——Testator, after certain specific bequests, gave to a chr 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. Rnmford, 47 L.J. Ch. 559.
Ch, Div, F. J,——C0nsiructi0n—(‘0clir-ils—Pa,1-tial Re'vocati0n—Arcelera. t|'on.—'I‘estatrix gave a share of residuary real estate devised for sale and personalty to E. for life, remainder to E.’s children: by a codicil