« PreviousContinue »
first taken proceedings to have the letters of administration revoked, justified the Court in requiring security for costs.—Han.kin v. Turner, 39 L.T. 285; 27 W.R. 20.
that as the appeals were unnecessary defendant must give security for o0sts.—Waddell v. Blockey, 27 W.R. Z33.
(lxvii.i.) C. A,—Appeal—Setting Down—ZlIistalce——Ord. 58, 1'. 8.AAn appeal must be entered before the day mentioned in the notice of appeal, or, if the day named is in vacation, before the next day on which the Court sits: a mistake of the meaning of the rules of Court by counsel or solicitor is not suflicient reason for granting an extension of time.—
(lxix.) C, A,—Appea.l—Time— New Trial.——A rule for a new trial having been made absolute, held that an appeal from the order could not be brought after twenty-one days; leave to extend time for appealing refused.—Highton v. Treherne, 39, L.T. 411; 27 W.R. 21-5.
(lxx.) C. .A.—Appeal—Time—Verdiet of Ju.dge.—Wl1ere a judge of the Ch. Div. has pronounced a verdict on a question of fact and subsequently delivered judgment, the verdict is an interlocutory order and must be appealed from within twenty-one days, such appeal being in the form of an application for a new trial.—Krehl v. Burrell, 39 L.T. 461; 27 W.R. 324.
(lxxi.) C, A,—AppeaL—Verdict Directed by Judye—New Tr1'al—()rd. 40, r. 4 a.— When a judge directs the jury to find a verdict for one of the parties and gives judgment, the other party cannot appeal to the Court of Appeal, but must apply to the Divisional Court for a new trial.— Yetta v.
(lxxii.) C. P. DiV,—.-lppeal from County Court—Entering Judgment38 3‘ 39 Vict., c. 50, s. 6.—On appeal by motion under the County Courts Act, 1875, s. 6, the Court has power to order judgment to be entered as provided by 13 & 14 Vict., c. 61, s. 14.—Whiteman v. Hawkins, L.R.4: C.P.D. 13.
(lxxiii.) C. P. DiV.- -Appeal from County Cou.rt—Time—38 §f 39 Vict., c. 50, s. 6.—-Where in order to extend the time for appealing, a County Court Judge allowed his judgment to be entered as delivered a fortnight after the day on which it was delivered: Held that the time within which an appeal must be brought was eight days from the day on
which the judgment was actually pronounced.—Wilbe1-fo-roe v. Sowton, 48 L.J., C.P. 28; 39 L.T. 474.
(lxxiv.) EX. DiV.—Appealf1-om Master-—Ti1ne—Ord. 54, 'r. 4.—A summons on appeal to judge at chambers from the master must be returnable before the judge within four days from the decision of the master. -—Bell v. North Sfa_[Tor<1shio-e Railway Co., 27 W.R. 263.
(lxxv.) C. A.-—Appearance—~ N0tic0—D0fasuil.—A writ of summons was issued in a district registry : defendant entered appearance in London, but gave no notice to plaintiff's solicitor in the district: Held that plaintifi was entitled to sign judgment for default of appearance.S-miih v. Dobbin, L.R. 3 Ex. D. 338.
(lxxwi) Ch. Div. F. J.—Costs—Administrati0n—Part|21.l Distribution.Executors and trustees distributed three-fourths of testator's residuary estate, bntneglected to give accounts of or pay the income of the remaining fourth to the person entitled; on an administration action, held that the trustees were personally liable for the costs of action, except those
of the accounts and enquiries, which must be born by the whole of the residue, and that the trustees were also personally liable for the share of these costs falling on the residue already distribnted.—Bath v. Bell, 89 L.T. 422.
(lxxvii.) Ex. DiV.——C'nsts—Claimfor £50 and Intere.-;t—30 Q‘ 31 Vict., c. 142, s. 7.—A claim for £50 and interest is a claim exceeding £50 within sec. 7 of County Courts Act, 1867, and when an action on such a claim is brought in the High Court, it is not competent for a judge to order on dismissing an application by defendant to have the action tried in the County Court, that if £50 only be recovered, plaiutifi shall only be entitled to County Court costs.—Insley v. Jones, L.R. 4 Ex. D. 16; 27 W.B. 111.
C. P. DiV.—C0sts--Counter C'laim—Summons to Vary Entr'y.—On the findings of the jury in an action the judge directed a verdict to be entered for plaintifi for the balance of his claim over the counter claim. On summons to vary entry by stating that plaintifi and defendant respectively recovered, so as to give defendant costs of counter claim, the Court refused to interfere.-Pofler v. Chambers, 39 L.T. 350.
Ch. Div. M. R.—C0sts—Discretion of Oou/rt—Trade Ma/rk Registration.—The costs of and incident to all proceedings that have actually come into the Court only are within the discretion of the Court under Order 55; and a case under the Trade Marks Regulation Acts does not come into Court until the parties opposing registration have given security for costs under Rule 18 of Trade Marks Rules, 1876.—Re Brendreth’s Trade Mark, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 618; 47 L.J. Ch. 816.
(lxxx.) B. DiV.—C'osts—No Order by Judge at Trial—Ord. 55.—When in an action before a jury no application as to costs is made at the trial, a subsequent application may be made to the Divisional Court, if made within a reasonable tin1e.—Bowey v. Bell, Brooks v. Israel, 27 W.B. 24.-7.
(lxxxi.) C. A.—C'osts—Revivor.—A plaintifi having obtained a decree with costs, died, and subsequently defendant gave notice of appeal: the executor of plaintifi then obtained the common order to revive, and the action was dismissed with costs on the appeal: Held that the executor was personally liable for the costs.——Boynton v. Boynton, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 250; 27 W.B.. 14-1.
(lxxxiii.) C. P. DiV.—-C'osts—Ta.w.tion.—The Court will not interfere with the master’s discretion as to the amount allowed for counsel's fees unless it is
obvious that he has failed to exercise it reasonably.—Hargrea.'ves v. Scott, L.R. 4 C.P.D. 21.
(1xxx.iv.) P. D.-—Costs—Ta.a>ati0n-—Negligence of Solicitor.-On taxation of costs of a cause between solicitor and client, the registrar cannot cmsider objections raised by the client to some of the items on the ground that they were incurred in consequence of the solicitor’s negl.igence.—The Papa de Rossie, L.R. 3 P.D. 160.
(lxxxv.) C. A.—Costs—Tn:ru.ti0n—Ord. 3, r. 7.—Where a writ was indorsed with the amount of a debt and a sum claimed for costs, and defendant after the expiration of four days from service paid to plaintiff the whole amount which he accepted: Held that defendant was entitled to have the costs taxed.—Hoolc v. Tim-n-show, 39 L.T. 409.
(lxxxvi.) C. A.—Costs—Ta,a>atio1trSIwrt.ha,nd Notes.—Plaintifi and defendant having agreed that a short-hand writer should be employed at the hearing at their joint expense, an order was made in favour of defendant from which plaintiff appealed, and the appeal was dismissed with costs :
Held that the taxing master could not, in the absence of special directions by the Court, allow the costs of copies of the notes or the sum paid by defendant to short-hand writer.—Ashworth v. Outram, L.R. 9 Ch. D.
(lxxxvii.) Ex. DiV.—-Costs—Ta.mtion——Short-hand Notes.—'l‘be costs of making copies of the transcript of short-hand notes will not be allowed on taxation in the absence of any direction by judge at trial.-—Wills v. Mitcham Gas Co., L.R. 4- Ex. D. 1; 27 W.R. 112.
(lxxxviii.) C. A.—Defa.'uZt of Appea/rance—Mar-ried T’Vom-a.n—Ju,dgment set Aside. —A married woman was sued on a cheque which she had signed at her husband’s request, and handed the writ to him, he promising to attend to it : no appearance was entered, and judgment was signed : more than a year afterwards, a summons to commit her having been taken out, the judgment was set aside on her application.—Attwood v. Chichester, L.R. 3 Q.B.D. 722.
(lxxxix.) C. P. Div.-—Discovery—A1fidavit of Docu/mo'nts.—The omission of the words, “and never have had,” from an afiidavit of documents is suflicient reason for ordering a further aifidavit.—Wagstafl'e v. Anderson, 39 L.T. 332.
C. A.—Disc0've1-y —-Interrogatories. — Where plaintiff sued as administrator on a breach of covenant, and defendants alleged a verbal consent by intestate to the breach : Held that plaintiff could interrogate defendant as to when the consent was given, but not as to the persons present at the time.—-Eade v. Jacobs, L.R. 3 Ex. D. 335.
(xci.) C. A.——Disco1:ery—Inte1-roga.tor1'es— Striking out — Ord. 31, r. 5.—A party who applies to strike out interrogatories must, unless they are altogether objectionable, specify those to which he 0bjects.—AZl-husen v. Labouclw're,L.R. 3 Q.B.D. 654; 47 L.J. Q.B. 819; 39 L.T. 207; 27 W.R. 12.
(xcii.) Ch. Div. M. R.—Discove'ry-—Interrogatories—Time for Deliver-y.—In an ordinary action in the Chancery Division interrogatories may be delivered before statement of defence.—Ha'rborcl v. Monk, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 616; 27 W.R. 164.
(xciii.) C. A..—Discovery—P'roduction. of Court RoZZs.—In an action concerning disputed rights as to a sheepwalk, plaintifi alleged that he was a freeholder of a farm, and as such entitled to the sheepwalk ; and defendant, the lord of the manor, alleged that plaintifi was only a freehold tonant of the manor in respect of the farm: Held that plaintiff was not entitled to the production of the Court rolls of the mauor.—Owen v. Wynn, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 29.
(xciv.) C.A.—Discovery——P1-oduction of Documents—-Privilege.—A party making an afiidavit as to documents and claiming protection for some of them as privileged will not be required to identify those for which protection is claimed further than he would if no protection was claimed.—Ta.ylm' v. BzLit0'n, 39 L.T. 408; 27 W.R. 106.
(xcv.) Ex. DiV.—Discovery-—Product-io'n of Documents——0rd. 31, r. 12.—In the absence of an aflidavit, showing circumstances rendering immediate discovery necessary, no order for discovery of documents will be made before delivery of statement of defence.—Ha/n.cock v. Guerin, L.R. 4| Ex. D. 3: 27 W.R. 112.
(xcvi.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.——Evid.ence—C'ommission.—Defendaut company, which was registered in England and whose business was in Paris, applied for a commission to examine witnesses at Paris and Boulogne, and in their afiidavit stated that certain persons residing there were necessary witnesses: the Court ordered the commission to issue, and required no security for costs.—Spiller v. Paris Skating Rink Co., 27 W.R. 225.
(xcvii.) C, A_,—Inju/rwi/ion—Forez'gn Suit.—The Court will not, in the absence of special circumstances, interfere to restrain by injunction proceedings taken in a foreign Court.--Fletcher v. Rodgers, 27 W.R. 97.
(0.) C. A.—Motion to Enter Judgment—-Misdirectiow—Ord. 40, r. 4.— Where defendant at close of plaintifi’s case asked the judge to withdraw the case from the and enter judgment for him, but the judge left certain questions to the jury, who found in plaintilfs favour: Held that defendant conld not move in the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgment under Ord. 40, r. 4, as it was, in efiect, asking for a new trial, but he must, first go to a Divisional Com't.—Davies v. Febiz, 48 L.J. Q.B. 3; 39 L.T. 322; 27 W.R. 108.
(ci.) Ch. Div, V, C, B.—Pa/rt,ies—Act-ion by L-ife-Tena/nt against Ewecufor. ——A tenant for life under a will brought an action against the executor, claiming that certain mortgage debts on the estate, which had been paid off out of income, should have been paid out of corpus, and repayment of the money, and, so far as necessary, administration of trusts of will: Held that the remainder-men were not necessary parties.-—Bemment v. Balls, 47 L.J. Cb. 781.
(cli.) Ch. Div, F, J'_—Pa/rties—Death of De_fendant—Lea'ue to A-me11d.— Where in an action against a defendant for damages occasioned by defendant's fraud, he dies, leave may be obtained, em pa/rte, to amend the statement of claim so as to make a primzi facie case against defendant's personal representatives, and to add such representatives as defendants. —-Ashley v. Ta/ylor. 27 W.B. 228.
(ciii.) C. A.— Part1'es—Daath of PZaintifl'—Ord. 50, r. 4.—Plaintifl:' in an action, having recovered a verdict against defendants for statutory fraud, died while an appeal was pending in the House of Lords: Held that administratrix of plaintiff was entitled to be made a party under Ord. 5, r. 4-.—Twg/cross v. Grant, 48 L.J. C.P. 1 ; 27 W.R. 87.
(civ.) C. P. DiV.—Pa/rties—Joinder of Indorsee and Drawer of Bill.-A statement of claim contained claims by the indorsees of a bill of exchange and by the drawer : Held such a statement must be struck out as embarrassing.—-Smith v. Richardson, 27 W.R. 230.
(cvi.) Ch. DiV. V. C. B.—Pa.rties-—Redemption—Cons0lida,ti0n. of Mortgages. -——When a mortgagor brings a. redemption action, and mortgagee insists on an admitted right to consolidate the mortgage with another on lands, of which a third party is mortgagor, the Court will not make any decree in the absence of such third party.—-Mil-ls v. Jennings, 39 L.T. 442,
Ch. Div, M, R.—Parties—Representatiz-e Part-1—Orv.'l. 16, r. 14; 31, r. 4.—The practice of making an ofiicer of a. corporation a. party for the purpose of discovery is now abolished : a person must show that the parties having the same interest are numerous before he can be authorised to defend on behalf of all such pa.rties.—W1'lson v. Church, L.R. 9 Oh. D. 552; 39 L.T. 413.
pay the legacy into Court, but take out an administration summons, and accounts being waived, the decision of the judge may be obtained on a statement of facts in the nature of a special oase.—-Re Birkett, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 576; 39 L.T. 418; 27 W.R. 164,-.
(cix.) C. A.—Payment into C011/rt—Admission of Liability.—After a decree directing accounts in Chambers, if it appears, before the chief clerk's certificate as to the ultimate balance is made, that a certain sum will probably be found due from either party, the Court has power to order such sum to be paid into Court: an admission of liability suflicient to support a motion for payment into Court may be made by the party or his agent, without appearing in the pleadings or afl'ldavits.—Lonclon Syndicatfl v. Lord, 48 L.J. Ch. 57.
(cx.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.—Payment of Dividenuls—Infanf Entitled to Stock— 11 Geo. IV. .§/' 1 Will. IV., c. 65.—An infant was beneficially entitled to a a. sum of consuls standing in her name : on a petition presented in an action, and under sec. 32 of 11 Geo. IV. & 1 Will. IV., c. 65, by her father, and by the infant by her father as next friend, payment of the dividends to the father for the infa.nt’s benefit was ordered.—Ranno‘n v. Ramon, 39 L.T. 532; 27 W.R. 260.
(cxi.) Ch. Div, F, J_——Pay'/nent out of C0urt—Trustr.ve Relief Act—Se1-rice of Petit'ion—Chan.cery Funds Ame1wled—Ordew's, 1874, 1'. 8.—Where the rights of parties to money paid into Court under the Trustee Belief Act have been declared in an action, it is unnecessary to serve the petition for payment out on persons not interested, though they are stated by the trustee’s affidavit to be interested.—Re Fosbury's Trusts, 39 L.T. 422.
(oxv.) C. A.—Pleadin.g—Dem-urrea-.——A defendant who has put in a statement of defence may afterwards demur to an amended statement of claim, though no substantially new case is made by the amendment.—P0well v. Jeweslmry, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 34-; 39 L.T. 213; 27 W.R. 142.
(cxvi.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.—P/eading—Denz-urrer—-Statute of L-imitati0ns.—A defence under the Statute of Limitations may in all oases be raised by den1urrer.~——N0yes v. Crawley, L.R.. 10 Ch. D. 31; 39 L.T. 267; 27 W.R. 109.
(cxvii.) Q. B. DiV.—Plead|'ng—Statement of Ola-im-'-Ejectment.—In an action for the recovery of land, the Statement of Claim alleged that plaintifi was heir male of the body of certain persons, and heir.at-law of another person, all of whom at the time of their deaths were possessed in fee simple of the property in question, and that under certain deeds, assurances, and wills in the possession of defendants, plaintili as such heir male, and heir_at-law was entitled to possession of the property: Held that the Statement of Claim was not enibm-rassing.——Phillips v. Phillips, 39 L.T. 329.