Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

tiff was a member, to G., the petitioning creditor, no proceedings hav ing been taken against the public officer of the Company. A warrant of seizure was issued to F., the messenger of the Court of Bankruptcy, dated the 30th July, 1849. The creditors' assignee was appointed on the 21st of August. The stat. 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, came into operation on the 11th of October, and, on the 18th of October, the plaintiff's goods were seized and sold by the messenger under the warrant:-Held, that the fiat was invalid, and that either the petitioning creditor or the messenger was liable in trover for the wrongful sei

[blocks in formation]

A concealment by a bankrupt of his property, with intent to defraud his creditors, renders his certificate void under the 5 & 6 Vict. c. 122, s. 38, notwithstanding he has made a full disclosure of the circumstances to the Commissioner before his last examination. Courtivron v. Meunier, 74

(3). Order and Disposition. M., the owner of certain goods, put C. into possession of them, who remained so until and after the death of the owner, who died intestate. After M.'s death, the defendant sold the goods by the desire and as the property of C., who had previously committed an act of bankruptcy, of

[blocks in formation]

(1). Deed of Arrangement.

A deed of arrangement between an insolvent trader and his creditors is not, under the 224th section of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act (12 & 13 Vict. c. 106), obligatory on the creditors who have not executed it, unless it provides for the entire distribution of the trader's estate amongst his creditors.

A plea of such arrangement by deed, should allege that the debtor was a trader for six calendar months preceding his suspension of payment. 670 Drew v. Collins,

(2). Reputed Ownership under Sect. 141. Goods in the order and disposition

BANKRUPT LAW &c.

of a bankrupt as reputed owner do not pass to his assignees under the 141st section of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act, (12 & 13 Vict. c. 106); but, in order to vest the property in such goods in the assignees or other person, the Court of Bankruptcy must make an order under the provisions of the 125th section.— Platt, B., dubitante.

Quare, whether such an order is final and conclusive in a Court of law, where the claimant of the goods does Hesnot petition under section 12. lop v. Baker,

(3). Writ of Execution under Sect. 257.

740

A writ of execution, issued under the 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, s. 257, against a bankrupt during the suspension of his certificate of conformity, cannot be enforced after such certificate has come into operation. In Re Everard, 111

(4). Seizure and Sale before Fiat.

Under the 184th section of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act, 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, a creditor who has obtained judgment in an adverse action against a bankrupt, and has issued a fi. fa. thereon, and sold the goods, is not entitled to the proceeds, unless not only the seizure but the sale also takes place before the date of the fiat or the filing of the petition for adjudication. Hutton v. Cooper, 159

(5). Costs in Bankruptcy.

A writ of summons having issued, proceedings in bankruptcy were taken against the defendant under the 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, s. 78; and the Commissioner made an order under the 85th section of that Act, that the costs of such proceedings should abide

[blocks in formation]

a Judge's order was made for staying proceedings on payment of debt and costs. The Master in this Court taxed the costs of the action, and gave his allocatur for their amount, together with the debt; and the other costs having been taxed by the officer in bankruptcy, the Master added the two sums together, and judgment was signed for the whole:-Held, that the proceedings were regular, as the costs in bankruptcy, when taxed by the Master in bankruptcy, became part of the judgment of this Court. Webb v. Hewlett,

BENEFICE.

See CHURCH.

BILL OF EXCHANGE. See ONUS PROBANDI.

(1). Indorsement.

107

[blocks in formation]

by the secretary:-Held, in an action upon the bill against the Company, that the bill sufficiently expressed, upon the face of it that it was accepted on behalf of the Company, within the 45th section of the 7 & 8 Vict. c. 110, and that the Company were liable upon the bill. Edwards v. Cameron's Coalbrook Steam Coal and Swansea and Loughor Railway Company, 269

(3). Foreign Bill of Exchange.

A. S., a merchant at Trieste, in November, 1841, drew upon Messrs. D. & Co., the defendants, merchants at Liverpool, several bills of exchange, in two parts, and requested them to accept and send them to Messrs. Glyn & Co., the London bankers of the defendants, and directed that the bills were to be held by them at the disposition of the holders of the seconds. The seconds were negotiated at Trieste, and were addressed at the foot to Messrs. D. & Co., payable in London, the firsts with Messrs. Glyn & Co. Messrs. D. & Co. wrote across the bills a memorandum of acceptance, and transmitted them to Messrs. Glyn & Co., to be held at the disposition of the holders of the seconds; and by letters dated the 3rd and 8th of December respectively informed A. S. of what they had done. At the time the firsts were so remitted to Messrs. D. & Co., A. S. had sent seconds to F. & Co. at Paris, to be discounted, but they declined to discount them; and the seconds were returned to A. S. on the 8th and 13th of December, and were then cancelled by him. On the 4th of December A. S. wrote to Messrs. Glyn & Co., requesting them to hand to Messrs. D. & Co. all the firsts so drawn by him upon them, and handed to Messrs. Glyn & Co. as before mention

[ocr errors]

ed. He also wrote to Messrs. D. & Co. to request them to instruct Messrs. Glyn & Co. to return all the said firsts which remained in their hands. On the 7th of December A. S. wrote to Messrs. D. & Co. that he had annulled the previous instructions to Messrs. Glyn & Co., and he requested Messrs. D. & Co. to replace the firsts in the hands of Messrs. Glyn & Co., to be held as before. On the 15th of December Messrs. Glyn & Co. remitted the bills to Messrs. D. & Co., pursuant to the letter of the 4th; and Messrs. D. & Co., on the 16th, cancelled the acceptances. On the 18th of December, Messrs. D. & Co., after the receipt of the letter of the 7th of December, wrote as follows:-" As we stated on the 16th, the firsts of your drafts which Glyn & Co. returned to us were immediately cancelled, and it would hardly do therefore to re-issue them in their present state; but we have to-day written to Glyn & Co. explaining this, and requesting them to refer the holders of the se

conds to us, when they are presented to them." On the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd of December A. S. issued what purported to be seconds to interme diate indorsees, from whom the plaintiff afterwards received them for a valuable consideration, the said indorsees having no knowledge of the correspondence, except that A. S. represented to them that the firsts had been accepted:-Held, in an action by the holder against Messrs. D. & Co. on these alleged seconds, that their acceptances had been cancelled by the letter of the 4th of December being acted upon according to the intention of the drawer, and that the subsequent indorsements of the new seconds to the plaintiff conferred no right against Messrs. D. & Co.

Quare, whether the letter of the 18th of December amounted to a

BILL OF LADING.

fresh acceptance; but held, that if it did, the defendants having pleaded the facts as above stated, such fresh acceptance should have been pleaded by a new assignment.

A. S., the drawer, paid the holder of one of these bills upon its becoming due a part of the amount of the bill, both parties being at that time. abroad; but such payment was made and received in full satisfaction of the bill; which payment, according to the law of the country where the bill was made, was considered to be in full satisfaction of the bill:-Held, that such payment afforded a good defence to an action on the bill in this country. Ralli v. Dennistoun,

BILL OF LADING.

See STOPPAGE IN TRANSITU.

483

The plaintiff, a merchant at Leeds, contracted with the London partner of a firm carrying on business as merchants at London and Odessa, for the purchase of a quantity of linseed, to be paid for, half by drafts on the buyer at three months from the time of advice of the sale reaching Odessa, and the remainder at three months from the date of shipment. The London partner forwarded the contract to the Odessa partner, and the latter drew upon the plaintiff two bills of exchange on account of the linseed, which were duly accepted, and paid when due.

In order to fetch the linseed, the plaintiff chartered a vessel, which was to proceed with an outward cargo to Odessa, and there take on board, "from the agents of the freighter" the linseed, and, being so loaded, proceed to Hull, "and deliver the same to the order of the freighter, on being paid freight." The vessel having arrived at Odessa, the master applied for the linseed,

[blocks in formation]

and produced a copy of the charterparty, when he was informed that the cargo should be shipped in due time. A letter was also sent by the Odessa partner to the London partner, informing him of the arrival of the vessel, and stating that a portion of the linseed was ready for her. The Odessa house commenced loading the vessel; but, not being able to procure the entire quantity of linseed, the master consented to receive wheat in substitution thereof, which was accordingly shipped. When the loading of the linseed was completed, the Odessa partner wrote to the London partner, stating that he should have the bill of lading by the next post. The Odessa partner afterwards procured the master to sign bills of lading, making the goods deliverable "unto order or to assigns," and indorsed the bills of lading for value to a third person, who transferred them to the defendants:-Held, that, under the above circumstances, there was no such delivery of the goods as to vest the right of property or possession in the plaintiff. Ellershaw v. Magniac, 570

BILL OF SALE.

A bill of sale assigned to R. " all the household goods and furniture of every kind and description whatsoever in the house, No. 2, Meadowplace, more particularly mentioned and set forth in an inventory or schedule of even date herewith, and given up to R. on the execution thereof." At the time of the execution, one chair was delivered to R. in the name of the whole of the goods. The inventory did not mention all the goods in the house-Held, that no goods passed under the bill of sale except those specified in the inventory. Wood v. Rowcliffe, 407

[blocks in formation]

the carrier to affix in his office the notice required by that statute, will not render him responsible:-So held, on error in the Exchequer Chamber, reversing the judgment of the Court of Exchequer. Hart v. Baxendale, Baxendale v. Hart, 769

CASE, ACTION ON THE. See POOR LAW COMMISSIONERS.

CERTIFICATE FOR COSTS. See COUNTY COURT, (6), 1,2; (7).

CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMITY.

See BANKRUPT, (4).

CERTIORARI.

See COUNTY COURT, (1), (2).

CHURCH.

To a declaration in covenant by a sequestrator for rent due under a lease, whereby D., the rector of S., demised to the defendant the rectory and parsonage, with the tithes, except the parsonage-house, &c., for a term of fourteen years, if the rector should so long live, at the yearly rent of 9807.; the defendant pleaded that, before the sequestration, D. was indebted to V. and M. in large sums of money, and requested them to give time for payment, and also requested V. to lend him a further sum, which they consented to do, and V. lent the money, upon the terms that D. should execute the indenture in the declaration mentioned, and also another indenture for the purpose of authorising the defendant to apply the rent as the agent and for the benefit of V. and M. That D. did execute the indenture in the declaration mentioned,

« EelmineJätka »