Demand for
precise thing
awarded must
be made before
attachment
can issue.

allows the day fixed to elapse without having tendered such conveyance for execution, he cannot afterwards apply for an attachment, neither has he any remedy (Doe d. Williams v. Howell, 5 Ex. 299).

There must be a demand for the precise thing, or, if money is awarded, for the exact sum payable, before an attachment can issue, as there can be no refusal until such demand is made, and consequently no contempt. Where an award directed that a sum of money should be paid, and also that a wine warrant for a certain hogshead of wine lying in the London Docks should be delivered to the defendant, and demand was made for the payment of the money and the delivery of a hogshead of wine, the Court granted an attachment for the payment of the money, but refused to do so for the hogshead of wine, as the thing awarded was the warrant, not the hogshead (Hemsworth v. Brian, 1 C. B. 131). If an original award cannot be found, the Court will grant an attachment will be granted on a true copy, verified by affidavit, being produced, stating that the original award is lost (Hill v. Townsend, 3 Taunt. 45).

If original

award is lost, attachment

on verified

copy.

Grounds on

which motion

The party opposing the motion for an attachment for attachment must show cause against it, and for that purpose any can be opposed. irregularity in the proper service of any of the necessary copies of documents, or want of personal notice, or of any defect existing on the face of the award, or of ambiguity in the award, may be relied on-in most cases successfully—in answer to a motion for attachment; also that the party has performed the award as far as possible, or that the award was not executed by all the arbitrators (where there are more than one)

at the same time and in presence of each other. Where it is impossible for the plaintiff to make a demand on the defendant for the performance of the award, he may authorize his duly constituted agent to act for him. The authority to act must be by power of attorney, a copy of which must be left with the defendant at the time the demand is made (Laugher v. Laugher, 1 Dowl. 284).

Another mode of enforcing an award directing pay- By execution. ment of money or of costs is by execution, where the

submission may
be or has been made a rule of Court.
The statute 1 & 2 Vict. c. 100, s. 18, enacts, "That
all decrees and orders of Courts of equity, and all the
rules of Courts of common law, and all orders of the
Lord Chancellor and of the Court of Review in
matters of bankruptcy, and all orders of the Lord
Chancellor in matters of lunacy, whereby any sum
of money, or any costs, charges, or expenses shall be
payable to any person, shall have the effect of judg-
ments in the superior Courts of common law; and
the persons to whom any such moneys, or costs,
charges, or expenses shall be payable shall be deemed
judgment creditors within the meaning of this Act;
and all powers hereby given to the Judges of the
Superior Courts of common law, with respect to
matters depending in the same Courts, shall and may
be exercised by the Courts of equity with respect to
matters therein depending, and by the Lord Chan-
cellor and the Court of Review in matters of bank-
ruptcy, and by the Lord Chancellor in matters of
lunacy; and all remedies hereby given to judgment
creditors are in like manner given to persons to whom

Judicature

Acts as to performance of award being enforced by execution.

any moneys, costs, charges, or expenses are by such orders or rules respectively directed to be paid." When the rule, which is a rule nisi to enforce payment of the amount awarded, has been obtained, it is best to serve it personally; and the party against whom the rule has been obtained may show cause against the rule, and in so doing has the same grounds of defence as we have seen he has in cases where attachment is moved for, and may make the same use of them in order to prevent the rule being made absolute; but he cannot show cause against the rule the last day of term (Arthur v. Marshall, 2 D.. & L. 376). The Court, before making the rule absolute, will have to be convinced of its necessity to the same extent as would be the case on a motion for attachment, and the documents necessary to convince the Court will have to be produced. The performance of the award may be enforced by execution under the Judicature Acts, in the same way as a judgment of the Court-i.c., where the submission is made a rule of Court or order of a Judge (Order XLII.), and the same steps are taken to obtain judgment as under 1 & 2 Vict. c. 100, s. 18. The application should be made to a Judge at Chambers. on summons. Although an award does not per se act as a conveyance of land, and in order to transfer land there should be a conveyance properly executed in pursuance of the award, there are cases in which an award has by statute the same force as a conveyance—e.g.,. 41 Geo. III. c. 109. A rule to deliver possession of land pursuant to an award may be enforced as a judgment in ejectment by the Common Law Procedure

Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 125, s. 16), which provides, "When any award made on any such submission, document, or order of reference as aforesaid directs that possession of any lands or tenements capable of being the subject of an action of ejectment shall be delivered to any party, either forthwith or at any future time, or that any such party is entitled to the possession of any such lands or tenements, it shall be lawful for the Court of which the document authorizing the reference is, or is made a rule or order, to order any party to the reference who shall be in possession of any such lands or tenements, or any person in possession of the same, claiming under, or put in possession by him since the making of the document authorizing the reference, to deliver possession of the same to the party entitled thereto pursuant to the award, and such rule or order to deliver possession shall have the effect of a judgment in ejectment against every such party or person named in it, and execution may issue and possession shall be delivered by the sheriff as on a judgment in execution.

By the Railway Companies' Arbitration Act (22 & 23 Vict. c. 59, s. 26), full effect is given by all the superior Courts of law and equity to all references, arbitrations, and awards, the performance of which may, when the Court thinks fit, be compelled by distress against the property of the company, or by any other process against the companies respectively that the Court shall direct.

When a cause has been referred at Nisi Prius, and a verdict has been taken subject to the award of the

arbitrator, the sum awarded has the same effect as a verdict of a jury, and the party who has established his case may take out a judgment upon the verdict, and issue execution without the consent of the Court being obtained (Lloyd v. Lewis, L. R. 2 Ex. D. 7), but not where the verdict has not been taken on the reference, or the arbitrator is not empowered to enter a verdict, in both of which cases the consent of the Court to sign judgment must be obtained. When a certain day is fixed in the award for the payment of money, if execution is taken out before the day named, it will be set aside by the Court (Callard v. Paterson, 4 Taunt. 318).

Execution can only issue for the sum awarded, and interest on such sum from the date of the award will not be allowed (Lee v. Lingard, 1 East, 400).

If the award is lost, the Court will permit judgment to be entered up, on an affidavit of its contents being produced (Hill v. Townsend, 3 Taunt. 45).

CHAPTER XXX.

JURISDICTION OF COURTS OF EQUITY TO SET
ASIDE AN AWARD.

COURTS of equity have always had an extensive jurisdiction in relieving against an award, even in cases where the agreement is by consent out of Court,