« PreviousContinue »
(xiii.) C. A.–Stockbroker--Contract to Pay Differences—Gaming -8 & 9 Vict.,
c. 109, s. 18.-Defendant employed plaintiff to speculate for him on the Stock Exchange, it being understood between them that defendant, so long as the arrangement lasted, should only be liable to pay or receive differences: in an action by plaintiff for commission and indemnity against liabilities incurred on the Stock Exchange for benefit of de. fendant, defendant pleaded that the claim was illegal, as founded on gaming and wagering: Held that plaintiff was entitled to recover.
Thacker v. Hardy, 27 W.R. 158. (xiv.) C. P. Div.-Wrongful Conversion-Delivery to order of third party
Measure of Damages.--Plaintiffs employed L. to make waggons according to sample at a fixed price; and L. employed a waggon company to make them at a lower price; and afterwards it was arranged that plaintiff should pay the company direct. The waggon company delivered waggons to a railway company to order of plaintiff, and plaintiff sent a complaint to the waggon company and L. that they were not equal to sample, and stated that they would sell them and hold L. responsible for loss : L. rejected the waggons, and plaintiffs gave the railway company notice not to deliver the waggons without their order, but the railway company delivered them to the waggon company, who refused to give them up : in an action for wrongful conversion, Held that both companies were liable, and that plaintiffs were entitled to recover the full value of the goods at the time of conversion.-Johnson v. Lancashire and Yorkshire
Railway Co., L.R. 3 C.P.D. 499; 39 L.T. 448. Banker :(ii.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Surety-Current Account-Appropriation.
Bankers advanced money to C., and took as security a series of promissory notes, maturing at the rate of one a week for ten weeks, and w. as surety for C. gave a written undertaking that if the promissory notes were not paid he would secure the debt by a mortgage. Moneys were paid by C. into the bank more than sufficient to meet the notes, but C. also drew on the bank so that at the maturity of some of the bills his account was overdrawn: Held that the bankers were bound to apply moneys received after each note became payable primarily towards the payment of such note, and as they had not done so W. was discharged
from his suretyship.-Kinnaird v. Webster, 39 L.T. 494 ; 27 W.R. 212. Bankruptcy :(xxxii.) C. A.-Act of Bankruptcy-Adjudication-Holder of Bill of Salem
32 8. 33 Vict., c. 71, ss. 10, 11.-An adjudication of bankruptcy is con. clusive as against the holder of a bill of sale executed by the bankrupt, that the act of bankruptcy, on which the adjudication is founded, was in fact committed; but the holder of the bill may appeal from the adjudi.
cation.—Ex parte Learoyd, Re Faulds, L.R. 10 Ch. D. 3; 39 L.T. 525. (xxxiii.) C. A.-Act of Bankruptcy-Bill of Sale-Forbearance to Enforce Judg.
ment.—The forbearance of a creditor to enforce a judgment for a sum exceeding £50 against a trader is not such an equivalent for an assign. ment by the trader of the whole of his property, to secure a past debt, as to prevent it being an act of bankruptcy.--Ex parte Cooper, Re Baum
(2), 39 L.T. 523. (xxxiv.) C. J. B.-Act of Bankruptcy-Bill of Sale-Substantial Further
Advance. A shoemaker executed a bill of sale to a creditor on all his property, except book debts, to secure a past debt of £227 and a fresh advance of £15: Held that the £15 was a substantial further advance.
Ew parte Evans, Re Edwards, 39 L.T. 364. (xxxv.) C. J. B.-Appeal—Notice.-An appeal was entered with Registrar of Appeals within 21 days from date of order, but a copy of appeal notice
was not sent to Registrar of the Court appealed from till two months afterwards : Held that the appeal could not be heard.—Ex parte Sillence,
Re Sillence, 47 L.J. Bcy. 87. (xxxvi.) C. J. B.-Appeal-Person Aggrieved—Petitioning Creditor's Debt.
The trustee of a creditor's deed, on which an adjudication is founded, is entitled to appeal. A claim by a writ served at date of act of bankruptcy for a sum less than £50 and for costs, which, when ascertained, brought up the total to over £50, is not a good petitioning creditor's
debt.-Ex parte Sadler, Re Whelan, 39 L.T. 361; 27 W.R. 156. (xxxvii.) C. A.-Appeal—Security for Costs-Ord. 58, r. 15.—The Court of
Appeal can, notwithstanding Bankruptcy Rules 1870, r. 145, require such security as it thinks fit to be given for the costs of a bankruptcy appeal. -Ex parte Isaacs, Re Baum, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 271; 47 L.J. Boy. 111; 38
L.T. 924; 26 W.R. 890. (xxxviii.) C. A.-Appeal—Security for Costs—Default-Motion to Dismiss.-An
appellant having been ordered to give security for costs of appeal, and not having done so, respondents gave notice of motion to dismiss appeal for want of prosecution. Before the motion came on the appellants gave the security: Held that appellants must pay costs of motion before appeal could be heard.—Ex parte Isaacs, Re Baum (2), L.R. 10 Ch. D. 1;
39 L.T. 520. (xxxix.) C. J. B.-Composition-Debtor's Statement, Rescinding Resolutions
32 & 33 Vict., c. 62, s. 11.-The Court will not rescind the registration of resolutions for composition on the ground of mis-statements of assets by debtor in the absence of sufficient evidence to convict him of mis. demeanour ander sec. 11, sub-sec. 6 of the Debtor's Act, 1869.--Ex
parte Hart, Re Law, 47 L.J. Bcy. 88. (xl.) C. J. B.-Discharge — Discretion of Court — Bankruptcy Act, 1869,
S. 48.-The Court has no discretion to refuse an order of dischage to a bankrupt, except in some one of the cases mentioned in section 48 of the
Bankruptcy Act.-Ex parte Hamilton, Re Hamilton, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 694. (xli.) C. A.-Discharge_Bankrupt–Taxation-Party Interested—6 & 7 Vict.,
c. 73.—Decision of V.C.B. (see Bankruptcy viii., p. 4) affirmed.-Re Lead
bitter and Harvey, 39 L.T. 286. (xlii.) C. J. B.-Equitable Assignment Direction to Pay.-A. authorised his
tenant in writing when the Michaelmas rent should become due, to pay B. £200 : before Michaelmas A. became bankrupt : Held that the trustee in bankruptcy was entitled to the rent in preference to B.--Ex parte
Rowell, Re Whitting, 39 L.T. 259; 27 W.R. 64. (xliü.) C. A.--Hire of Chattels—Disclaimer-Leasehold Interest-Bankruptcy
Rules, 1871, r. 28.-A hiring of chattels for a term of years is not a leasehold interest within Rule 28 of Bankruptcy Rules, 1871.-Sheffield
Waggon Co. v. Stratton, 48 L.J. Q.B. 35; 27 W.R. 120. (xliv.) C. A.-Leaseholds—Disclaimer-Fixtures.-Decision of C. J. B. (see
Bankruptcy, xiv., p. 4) reversed.—Ex parte Brook, Re Roberts, 39
L.T. 458; 27 W.R. 255. (xlv.) C. A.-Leaseholds - Omission to Disclaim--Trustee's Liability.-A
trustee in bankruptcy, who takes possession of leasehold property of bankrupt, and does not disclaim after notice from landlord, is personally liable for rent accruing due after he takes possession.—Ex parte Dressler,
Re Soloman, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 252 ; 39 L.T. 377; 27 W.R. 144. (xlvi.) C. A.-Liquidation-Apparent Possession-Discharge.—Where a debtor,
permitted by the trustee to retain possession of his furniture, holds himself out as the owner thereof, the trustee not having notice, does not
thereby forfeit his right to it: a discharge by joint creditors does not discharge the debtor from separate debts.—Meggy v. Imperial Discount
L.R. 3 Q.B.D. 711; 48 L.J. Q.B. 54. (xlvii.) Ex. Div.-Liquidation-Discharge–Subsequent Promise to Pay Previous
Debt.--A promise, made by a liquidating debtor after discharge, to pay debts incarred previously to liquidation is binding on him, if new and valuable consideration is given for the promise.—Jakeman v. Cook, L.R.
4 Ex. D. 26; 27 W.R. 171. (xlviii.) C. A.-Liquidation-Misdescription in Petition-Leave to Amend.-A
debtor described himself in his liquidation petition by his business address, and omitted mention of his private address : Held a substantial misdescription ; registration of resolutions and leave to amend refused. Ex parte Jerningham, Re Jerningham, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 466 ; 47 L.J. Boy.
115; 39 L.T. 186; 27 W.R. 157. (xlix.) C.J.B.-Liquidation-Purchase from Debtor-Description in Advertise.
ment.— The mere fact that a trustee has not taken possession of a debtor's property for two months after appointment, will not destroy his right to the property as against a bonâ fide parchaser from debtor : any objection to the description of the debtor in the advertisement must be taken before registration of creditors' resolutions.—Ex parte Cooper,
Re Green, 39 L.T. 260. (1.) C. A.-Liquidation - Small Assets — Discharge. — The fact that a
debtor's assets consist of litigated claims does not prevent his creditors from passing a resolution for liquidating by arrangement : delegation of the power of granting debtor's discharge is ultra vires.-Ex parte Hope,
Re Hope, L.R. 9 Ch.D. 398; 47 L.J. Boy. 116; 27 W.R. 7. (li.) C. J. B.-Order and Disposition-Share of Partnership.--A., a partner,
mortgaged his share in the partnership property and business to B. : the deed was not registered as a bill of sale, and the property remained in the occupation of the firm until the bankruptcy of A.: Held that A.'s interest in the partnership was a chose in action other than a debt within sec. 15, sub-sec. 5, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and that the property comprised in the deed was not in the order and disposition of A. at the time of the bankruptcy.-Ex parte Fletcher, In re Bainbridge, 47 L.J.
Bcy. 70. (lii.) C. J. B.-Proof-Loan Society-Subsequent Interest.— A loan society
advanced £250 to B. on condition that he should pay back €550 by monthly instalments: after he had paid some instalments he filed a petition for liquidation: Held that the society was entitled to prove for the whole of the balance of the £550 remaining unpaid.—Ex parte
Cockburn, Re Lundy, 39 L.T. 362. (lii.) C. J. B.-Proof in respect of Stolen Goods-Compounding Felony.
When bankrupt had absconded, and subsequently it was discovered by his employers that he had committed defalcations, but they did not issue a warrant against him till ten days afterwards; and he had not since been found : Held that the employers were entitled to prove in respect of the amount stolen.-Ex parte Turquand, Re Shepherd, L.R. 9 Ch. D.
704. (liv.) C. A.-Secured Creditor-Garnishee Order Nisi.-A judgment creditor
who has obtained a garnishee order nisi, attaching debts due to the debtor, before he has filed a liquidation petition, is a secured creditor within sec. 16, sub-sec. 5, of the Bankruptcy Act, and his title to the debts will prevail against the trustee, though some of them were not payable till after the commencement of the liquidation.-E. parte
Joselyne, Re Watt, 47 L.J. Bcy. 91. (lv.) C. A.-Substituted Service-Absconding Debtor-District Registry.—The
jurisdiction to make an order for substituted service under rule 61 of
Bankruptcy Rules, 1871, lies with the Court of the District in which the debtor's usual place of residence was previous to his absconding:Ex parte North Kent Bank, Re Holdsworth, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 333; 39 L.T.
379; 27 W.R. 158. (lvi.) C. A.-Undischarged Bankrupt-After-acquired Property.-In an action
by an undischarged bankrupt for work done by him for defendant after bankruptcy, it is no defence to plead that he is an undischarged bank.
rapt.-James v. Brick & Stone Co., 27 W.R. 221. (lvii.) C. A.-Undischarged Bankrupt — Damages in Action for Slander.
Damages recovered by an undischarged bankrupt in an action of slander, do not form part of his property divisible among his creditors within 8. 15, sub-s. 3, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869.-Ex parte Vine, In re
Wilson, 47 L.J. Bcy. 116. Bill of Sale :(v.) C.A.- Registration-Description of Grantor,—In the affidavit filed with a
copy of bill of sale the grantor was described as J. W. of L. Farm, in the County of C. The grantor's real name was J. W., bat he was generally known by, and had assumed the name of, J. A. W. The farm was in the County of the City of C.: Held that the description was sufficient.-Ex
parte Hattie, Re Wood, 39 L.T. 373. (vi.) C. A.-- Registration-Description of Witness.—Decision of Q. B. Div. (see
Bill of Sale iii., p. 7) affirmed. --Blount v. Harris, 39 L.T: 465; 27 W.R. 202. (vii.) C. A.-Unregistered Bill—Mortgage by Partners-Assignment-Bank
ruptcy.-Two partners in trade, A. and B., executed a mortgage of trade fixtures and chattels which was not registered as a bill of sale. After. wards A. retired from the partnership, and assigned his share in the goods to B. subject to the mortgage. B. subsequently filed a liquidation petition : Held that the loose chattels passed to the trustee in bankruptcy, and as to the fixtures that the mortgage was void as against the trustee to the extent only of the debtor's original moiety.—Ex parte Brown, Re
Reed, L.R. 9 Ch. D. 389; 39 L.T. 338; 27 W.R. 219. (viii.) C. A.-Unregistered Bill-Sale of Furniture and Subsequent Letting.
C. lent £150 to B., a trader, to pay out an execution, and B. gave him a receipt written at the foot of an inventory of furniture as a receipt for the money for an absolute sale of the furniture to C.; and on same day they executed a memorandum of agreement for C. to let to B. the furni. ture for two months for £170, in case of default by or bankruptcy of B., C. to seize the furniture and sell, if the £170 should be paid to C., then the furniture should belong to B. : Held that these two documents to. gether constituted a bill of sale requiring registration, and that no differ: ence in this respect was made by the fact of C. having been paid off by a third person who by a fresh agreement was put in the same position as
C.-Ex parte Odell, Re Walden, 39 L.T. 333. (ix.) C. A.-Unregistered Bill-Sale of Furniture and Subsequent Letting.
A trader sold furniture in his house to J., and at the foot of an in. ventory of the furniture signed a receipt for the money as purchase. money of the goods inventoried, and on same day delivered a chair to J. in the name of the furniture : J. verbally agreed to let the furniture to the trader, and it remained in his possession : Held that the inventory and receipt constituted a bill of sale, which, being unregistered, was void against the trader's trustee in liquidation.-Ev parte Cooper, Re Baum
(1), 39 L.T. 521. Building Society :(i.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Mortgage-Fine.-- Fines imposed by the rules of
a benefit building society and covenanted to be paid in a mortgage deed by a member, are part of the principal money secured by the mortgage,
and where an account is decreed, are included under the term "principal interest and costs.”—Provident Permanent Building Society v. Greenhill,
L.R. 9 Ch. D. 122; 27 W.R. 110. Burial Ground:(i.) C. A.-Burial Fees-Cemetery Act-New Ecclesiastical District.-By a
private Act for establishing a cemetery, it was provided that certain fees should be paid by the Cemetery Company to the Incumbent of the parish or ecclesiastical district from which any body should be removed for burial in the cemetery, and that a part of these fees should be handed over to the churchwardens to be applied among the persons entitled to share the barial fees in such parishes or districts : before the cemetery was made, the parish churchyard of C. was used as burial place for persons dying in the parish, and the Vicar of C. was entitled to the fees : after the Act, three separate ecclesiastical districts were formed out of the parish: Held that the incumbents of the three districts were entitled to the fees under the Act as against the Vicar.
Bowyer v. Stantial, L.R. 3 Ex. D. 315. Canada, Law of:(iii.) P. C.-Expropriation-Apportionment of Indemnity. The commissioners
appointed under Colonial Act, 27 & 28 Vict., c. 60, must under Colonial Act, 29 & 30 Vict., c. 56, s. 12, assess and appropriate the indemnity for expropriated land among the persons benefited by the improvement, at the same time that they determine the amount of the indemnity, and not after their report has been homologated.-Mayor of Montreal v.
Stephons, 47 L.J. P.C. 67. Common:(ii.) C.A.-Right of Fold-course—Finding on issues in previous suit--Estoppel.
-In an action to restrain the inclosure of part of waste lands by the lord of the manor in which the plaintiff claimed a liberty of freehold fold-course over the lands in question, it appeared that in a previous action between the parties' predecessors in title issnes had been directed as to the right of common claimed by plaintiff's predecessor in the lands, whether he was entitled to any and what liberty of fold.course ; and the finding thereon was that he was entitled to the liberty of two several fold-courses in the land : Held that this finding did not estopp defendants from denying that plaintiff had a right over the land other than a right of common.-Robinson v. Duleep Singh, 39 L.T. 313; 27
W.R. 21. Company:(xxii.) C. A.-Debenture-Charge on Estate Property and Effects.-Directors
of a company, with an office in London, and incorporated for the purpose of acquiring and dealing with land in Florence, were empowered by the articles to borrow money by mortgage of any of the company's property, or by bonds or debentures, entitling the holders to be paid ont of the property and effects of the company : bonds were issued, purporting to bind the members of the company, and all their estate, property, and effects, to repay the money borrowed : Held that these bonds constituted a charge on the property of the company for the time being.-Moor's
Case, Re Florence Land, &-c., Co., 27 W.R. 236. (xxiii.) Ch. Div. V.C.B.—Director's Qualification-Resignation—Liability.
A company's act provided that the qualification for directorship should be twenty shares, that P. and others should be first directors and continue in office till first ordinary meeting: no ordinary meeting was held within six months after the passing of the Act: P. resigned his office before the first ordinary meeting, and received a cheque as remuneration for his