Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Digitized
by Microsoft
KD
V.
feniel)
3 1924 02r"^'Smmm
Digitized
by Microsoft
This
book was
digitized
by Microsoft Corporation
in
cooperation
witli
or
provide access to
for
Digitized
by Microsoft
A DIGEST OF ENGLISH
VOL.
I.
CIVIL LA\^
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
A DIGEST
M.A., B.C.L.
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE PRIhTClPAL AND DIRECTOR OF LEGAL STUDIES OF THE LAW society; FORMERLY FELLOW OF KING'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
((Biritnr)
B.C.L.,
R.
W. LEE, M. A.,
B.C.L.,
K.C. (Quebec)
of gray's inn; professor of romanDUTCH LAW IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD READER IN JURISPRUDENCE OF THE COUNCIL OF
",
OF Lincoln's inn; vinerian professor of ENGLISH law; FELLOW OF ALL SOULS COLLEGE, OXFORD
W.
S.
HOLDSWORTH,
D.C.L., K.C.
^"""''-
OF LINCOLN'S INN; ALL SOULS READER IN ENGLISH law; FELLOW AND ASSISTANT TUTOR OF ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE, OXFORD;, FOREIGN ASSOCIATE OF THE ROYAL BELGIAN ACADEMY
^'
IVliLiCiO, IVl.A,,
iS.CLi.
OF THE INNER TEMPLE; FELLOW AND TUTOR OF MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD; LATE SOLICITOR TO THE MINISTRY OF LABOUR; KNIGHT BACHELOR
^arrtatera at %aia
SECOND EDITION
VOL.
I.
General
Obligations
II
III
Property
LONDON
BUTTEEWORTH &
SYDNEY
:
CO.,
CALCUTTA
WINNIPEG
WELLINGTON
(n.Z.)":
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
in eleven instalments
now
republished in con-
The
and
down
to date
new Tables
of Statutes
new and comprehensive Index, have replaced the former fragmentary lists. The favour with
Cases, as well as a
which the instalments, despite their obvious inconveniences, have been received, encourages the authors to hope that,
in its greatly irtiproved form, the consolidated edition
may
meet with
still
greater approval.
it
professes
at when the work of purely private authorsno other respect than that which
authority.
It
claims
least,
it
is
is
it
represents
an honest,
intelligent,
and
But no one
who
is
materials of English
Law have
if
been
left
regard to
it,
attempt
will
scientific enquirers
and to busy
practitioners,
service.
The extent
of
Digitized
by Microsoft
iv
may
more volumes
to be found in
library
to those
it is
through them.
The chief intellectual effort demanded of the authors of the work has been to extract, by appropriate treatment, from this formless heap of statutes and judicial decisions, the rules which such authorities enunciate and expound, and to arrange those rules in the most convenient and As a basis, the authors have followed accessible form. what is now the generally accepted plan of the European
Civil
Codes
of the
work by Continental
readers,
and
will, it is
hoped,
do something to further the important study of ComparaBut no British or American reader tive Jurisprudence.
need fear that English legal rules have, in
distorted to
fit
this
work, been
foreign phraseology.
Law
been made
to
fit
Enghsh materials
Family
Law
Book IV.
Law
of
many
details
of
Book
III.,
Sec-
XVII.
It
may
Trust."
Digitized
by Microsoft
authority,
necessity of
limits
among
many
of the
more important
and
The
by no means neglecting
to
make
use of others.
study of
aim at analyzing
all
perfunctory.
This work
is
to
those
who know
it
a commonplace, that no
in
many
history.
of its branches,
It
is
of
its
hoped,
that
the historical
notes
which have
been
may
not be without
student they may, possibly, seem not the least useful part
of the work.
It
is
co-operative
of each
in a double sense.
part of
it
been entrusted to
Digitized
by Microsoft
VI
of
might almost
Every
statement in the
first
the contents of
Book V. were
discussed in detail
It
is,
due to
this
been surprisingly
revision
for
been
though
his colleagues
rendefi
him
Those who
know anything
of the present
demand
with good reason, that his responsibilities in connection with it may be lightened, and the readers of the work
.
benefited,
of those colleagues
to
whose labours
work
is
mainly
chief;
due,
and laborious
The editor and his colleagues are indebted, for the consolidated Tables of Statutes and Cases, which, add so greatly to the usefulness of the edition, to Mr. A. D. Bowers,
Digitized
by Microsoft
vu
such a work
from
its
London,
December, 1920.
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
General
....
.
.
Edward Jenks
II.
I.
Obligations
Obligations arising from Con-
Part
tract (General)
R.
W.
Lee
Part
II.
ticular Contracts
....
arising
R.
W. Lee
Part
III. Obligations
from
J. C. Miles
.
Book Book
III.
Edward Jenks
IV.
Family
Law
W.
W. M.
S.
Geldart
Book
V.
Succession
Holdsworth
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
'!'i
.![
,,:
CONTENTS
CONTENTS OF BOOK
(General)
Section I. PERSONS
,
./
'
11 /
PAGE
Title Title
Section
I.
Natural Persons
Artificial Persons
'
.;'
II.
II.THINGS
At
IS
Section III.LEGAL
ACTS
20
32
Title
Title
I.
II.
Title
III.
....
.
47
52
Title IV.
67
....
II,
72 82
CONTENTS OF BOOK
(Obligations.
Section I. FORMATION
,
Part
Contract (General))
i.i
i
'
OF CONTRACT
.
Title
Title
I.
II.
8S
92
103
Section
Section
Title Title
Duty of Performance
Consequences of Non-Performance Impossibility of Performance
105^
II.
120 129
Title
III.
Digitized
by Microsoft
Xll
CONTENTS
OF CONTRACT continued.
.
.
Reciprocal Promises
.134 .136
.
CONTRACT Section V.DISCHARGE OF CONTRACT. Section VI.DISCHARGE OF RIGHTS OF ACTION ARISING FROM CONTRACT
SectionIV.ASSIGNMENT OF,
. . .
141
144
....
.
150
153
AND CO-CREDITORS
II,
CONTENTS OF BOOK
(Obligations.
Section I. SALE
Part
II
Contracts (Particular))
161
Title Title
Section
I.
Sale of Goods
Sale of Land
II.
II.HIRE
....
.
184
195
Section III.LOAN
Title Title
Section
I.
II.
198
201
IV.DEPOSIT
203
Section
V.EMPLOYMENT
I.
Title
Title
II.
207
216
221 225
Wages
V.
228
VI. INNKEEPER
VII. CARRIAGE
-
AND GUEST
.
.
244 249
262
VIII.PARTNERSHIP
IX.GUARANTEE
290
.
303
309
Digitized
by Microsoft
CONTENTS
xiii
CONTENTS OF BOOK
(Obligations.
A. B.
PAGE
QUASI-CONTRACT
315
TORTS
Section I. GENERAL
Title
Title
I.
Preliminary
Capacity
in
.....
.
.
II.
Exemptions from Liability for Torts Respect of Torts Liability for the Torts of Others
Title Title
III.
Title IV.
V.
Title VI.
....
.
.
369
RESPECT OF LAND
Title Title
Title
I.
Trespass
Dispossession
II.-
III.
Nuisance
380
388
391
Title IV.
Other Torts
in
405
Section III.TORTS IN
RESPECT OF CHATTELS
PERSONAL
Title
Title
I.
Trespass to Goods
II.
Conversion
.....
and Battery
.
407
414
422
Title
III.
Title IV.
Personal
Section
.......
in
Respect of Chattels
426
Title
Sub-Title A.
Sue-Title B.
False
431
Imprisonment
in
439
Title
II.
Other Injuries
Person
Title
III.
.......
.
.
Respect of the
445
Digitized
by Microsoft
xiv
CONTENTS
PAGE
continued.
B.
TORTS
Section
Seduction
II.
Loss
.....
.
.
464 470
of Consortium
Title
III.
Deprivation of Services
474
479
481
Title IV.
Section
VI. CONSPIRACY
IN
.....
.
.
Section VII.TORTS
THE
Title Title
^Malicious Prosecution
Civil Process
II.
......
.
.
and Abuse of
487
496
,,
RIGHTS, EXECUTION,
Section
AND DISTRESS
! ,
529
].
X.DECEIT
'
53^
WORK.
545
CONTENTS OF BOOK
(Propertx)
a;
III
CONTENTS
A.
XV
PAGE
lAND continued.
Section I. INTERESTS IN
LANDcontinued.
Heredita669
Title
IX.
(Purely) Incorporeal
ments
Title
Title
X.
XI.
.......
.
744
748
Title XII.
verse Possession
Section II.RIGHTS
.....
. .
762
Title
Title Title
II.
III.
769
777
Interests
Section
.......
'
785
III.RESTRICTIONS
Conditions
ON USER AND
793
ALIENATION OF LAND
Title Title
I.
.....
.
II.
802
OF LAND
.
Title
I.
II.
III.
Title IV.
V.
Absolute Conveyance Inter Vivos Conveyance by Way of Mortgage Charges on Land Adverse Possession Prescription and Custom
. . .
808
811;
....
.
837 842
849
V. INVOLUNTARY
ALIENATION
OF
859
LAND
Section VI.OVER-RIDING POWERS AFFECTING
LAND
Title
I.-^Powers of Appointment
II.
866
878
Title
Section VII.INCAPACITY
ATE LAND
Title
I.
,
^Minors
Title
II.
Married Women
.....
898
904
Digitized
by Microsoft
xvi
CONTENTS
PAGE
continued.
A.
LAND
ATE
Title Title
B.
'LP>NT) continued.
III.
Corporations
Title IV.
V.
Charitable Trusts
Miscellaneous
.....913 ....
. .
909
917
CHATTELS CORPOREAL
Section VIII. POSSESSION
OF CHATTELS COR920
POREAL
Title
Title
Section
I.
II.
926
Title Title
Section
II.
......
.
.
927 932
Title Title
Section
II.
936
949
XLINVOLUNTARY
ALIENATION OF
.
.
C.
CHATTELS CORPOREAL .969 XII.INCAPACITY TO* HOLD AND ALIENATE CHATTELS CORPOREAL .974 CHOSES IN ACTION Section XIILNATURE AND DEFINITIOI^ OF CHOSES IN ACTION
.
Section
Title Title
I.
II.
General Debts
..... ......
.
. .
979
985
991 1000
1015
Title VI.
Title VII.
Copyright
.....<. .....
by Microsoft
1024
1032
Digitized
CONTENTS
C.
XVIJ
PAGE
'IT
CHOSES
./-I
.
IN
Title Title
Section
I.
II.
w,
1047
1053
XV.
Title Title Title
INEFFECTUAL
I.
ALIENATIONS
OF
1058
PROPERTY
II.
Under the Act of 1571 Under the Bankruptcy Act and the
. . . .
Companies Act
III.
1066
[1
yNDER
petuities
Title IV.
tion
....... .......
the
Rule
against
Per-
1073
Section
XVI. CO-OWNERSHIP
Title Title
I.
II.
Title
III.
....
/'
. . . . . . .
1083
1088
1093 1095
Title IV.
Section
Co-parcenary
General
Appointment and Removal of t'l' 1106 Trustees Title III. Duties of Trustees ,^11112 .1126 Powers of Trustees Title IV.
II.
. . . .
.......
. . . .
.....
1097
Title
Title
V.
VI.
Rights, of Trustees
.,1138
1141
Title VII.
Title VIII.
Remedies for Breach of Trust Transfer of the Trust Estate Beneficial the Transfer of
1148
Interest
.......
IV
. .
1152
CONTENTS OF BOOK
(Family Law)
Section I.MARRIAGE
Title Title
I.
II.
.1155
.
1169
Digitized
by Microsoft
XVIH
CONTENTS
Section I.MARRIAGEfowtmw^*^.
178
Title IV.
Title V.
tion
Marriage
Section
II.RELATIONS
AND GUARDIANS
Title Title Title
I.
and
Duties
Arising
out
of
1179
OF CHILDREN, PARENTS,
1205
Legitimacy
II.
1210
1215
III.
Title IV.
in
1231
CONTENTS OF BOOK V
(Succession)
Section
LTESTAMENTARY
I.
SUCCESSION
of
Title
The
Codicils
Title
'
II.
^The
'
'
'
Title
III.
OR Codicil
Title IV.
........ ..;....
Making
Testaments
and
1237
I2SS
Legacies,
and
Donationes
1
Mortis Causa
261
SUCCESSION
I.
General
......
.
129s
II.
1297
1305
III.
Title IV.
Wife
Title V.
OF Kin
........ ........
between
Husband
and
1313
Digitized
by Microsoft
CONTENTS
Section. III.ADMINISTRATION
xix
PAGE
OF ASSETS
. .
Title Title
I.
II.
1329
Representative
Title
Title Title
III.
......
.
. .
1346
Personal Representative
IV.
....
. . . .
Assets
.1369
1375
1391
V.
Title VI.
Title VII.
Title VIII.
The Order in which Debts are Payable The Order of Resort to Assets Duties and Powers of the Personal
Representative
......
.
. .
.
1402
hz
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
PAGE
9 Hen. TIL (Magna Carta, 1225) t. 16
c.
c. c.
18
34
35
20 Hen.
III. (Statute of
c.
4
9
c.
51
Hen.
....
. . .
Merton, 1235)
,.
1
52 Hen.
689 20 J 688
532 697 625
c. 4, s. 5 c. c.
15
23
Edw.
I.
(Statute of Westminster
c.
c.
....
I.,
. . . .
1275)
13
Edw.
I.,
700 692
285).
.
56"
19
c.
c.
23
.
18
Edw.
I.
t. I
c.
c. 3
....
1300 ) {Aniculi super Cartas, 1300),
.
28 Edw.
33 17
I.,
St. I. (Reliefs,
St. III.
c.
481, 497
Edw. I., St. II. (Statute of Champerty, 1305) Edw. II. {De Prarogativd Regis, 1324), c. 17 18 Edw. II. (Statute for View of Frankpledge, 1325) 1 Edw. III., St. II. (Champerty, 1326), c. 14 2 Edw. III. (Hundreds and Wapentakes, 1328), c. 4 Edw. III. (Administration of Estates, 1330), c. 7 14 Edw, III. (Sheriffs, Bailiffs, etc., 1340), c. 9 23 Edw. III. (statute of Labourers, 1349), c. 2 25 Edw. III., St. I. (Statute of Labourers, 1350), c. 7 St. III. (Statute for the Clergy,' 1350)
.
497
687
678, 727
.
497
685
362, 1362
.
c-7
V. (Executors of Executors, 1350), cSt. VI. (Statute of Provisors, 1350) 31 Edw. III. (Administration in Intestacies, 1357), c. 34 Edw. III. (Statute of Labourers, 1360), c. 10 50 Edw. III. (Fraudulent Assurances, 1376), c. 6 I Ric. II. (Maintenance, 1377), c. 4 5 Ric. II., St. I. (Statute of Forcible Entry, 1381)
St.
.
730
731
362, 1362
730
475 748 497
383 82
c-7
c.
Digitized
by Microsoft
xxu
7 Ric.
TABLE OF STATUTES
497 748
383 82 82 687 692 692, 748 748 748 1410
II. (Maintenance and Champerty, 1383), c. 15 15 Ric. II. (Statute of Mortmain, 1391), c. 5 8 Hen. VI. (Statute of Forcible Entry, 14^9), c. 9
.
s. s.
7
1477),
.
c.
2
.
CI.
. .
' 4 Hen. VII. (Wardships, 1488), u. 17 19 Hen. VIJ. (Uses, 1503), c. 15 21 Hen. VIII. (Execution, 1529), c. 4 21 Hen. VIII. (Probate and Administration, 1529),
s. s-
2
3
...
15
.
5
13291 1403
c.
1337 608
Roman
Exactions
1533),
4
c.
1158 1159
10
553, 589, fi8, 609, 649, 664, 748, 867, 933, 1074, 1088, 1097
fj Hen. VIII. (Franchises, 1535), c. 24 28 Hen, VIII. (Succession to the Crown, 1536)^ c. 7, ss. 7, 11 28 Hen. VIII. (Release of Licenses and Dispensations from Rome, 1536): c. 16, s. 2 31 Hen. VIII. (Partition Act, 1539), c. 1
. .
'
c.
664, 684,
867
c.
3
.
497 640
1085
628, 629
1
32 32 32 32
1 540), c. 32 (Covenants Act, 1540), c. 34, ss. 1-2 (Administration of Estates, 1540), c. 37 (Marriage Contracts and Consanguinity, 1540), (Crown Debts, 1541), c. 39, s. 37 Hen. VIII. (Fines and Recoveries, 1542), t. 20, ss. 5 & 6 Edw. VI. (Sale of Offices Act, 1551), c. 16 I Eliz. (Act of Supremacy, 1558), c. i, s. 3 13 Eliz. (Fraudulent Conveyances, 1571), c. 5
'
(Partition Act,
38
1138
1058, 1059
2
5 13 Eliz. (Ministers (Ordination), etc., 1571), c. 27 Eliz. (Revocable Conveyances, 1584), c. 4
. ss. 2, 4, 5, 6 Eliz. (Juries, 1584), c. 6, s. i 31 Eliz. (Common Informers, 1588),
s.
1065 1059
730
1059, 1062
27
l. 5, s. 5
31 Eliz. (Simony, 1588), c. 6, s. 4 . 31 Eliz. (Market Overt, 1588), c. 12 43 Eliz. (Poor Relief Act, 1601), c. 2 s. 6
s._7
.... ....
c.
946
.
1212
I2I0, I2II
916
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
43 Eliz. (fraudulent Administration of Intestates' Estates, 1601), 3 Jac. I. (Popish Recusants, 1605), c. 5 . 21 Jac. I. (Statute of Monopolies, 1623), c. 3, ss. 1-6
.
XXUl
.......
c.
c. 8, s.
1343
1015
729,730
.
21 Jac.
I.
16
2 s-3
s. 5
s.
523
72, 73, 74, 81, 1348
12 Car. II.
9 10
....
I, s. C.
I
:,
18
22
& &
19 Car. II. {Cestui Que Vie Act, 1666), c. 23 Car. II. (Statute of Distribution, 1670^
s. s. s.
387 77 550, 589 i2I7,'i2t8, 1225, 1234 1231, 1234 I2I8 582
to
4
5
3 10,
'307. "308
.
22 & 23 Car. II. (Game Preservation, 1670), 29 Car. II. (Statute of Frauds, 1677), c. 3
s. a. S. s.
s.
I
c.
2
3
4
7
8
10
1312 1296 682, 687 25 609, 816, 1383 641, 764, 808 808 808, 809 86, 98, 184, 216, 222, 304, 841,. 1418 866, 948, 1 100 1100
.
5.9
s. s.
1051, 1153
752, I37I
25
1677),
c. c.
,
i3'5
29 Car. 30 Car.
I
II.
s.
69
II.
tort,
....
.
1678),
c. 7, s
17
1345 i35
1308
I
1
W. & M., St. II. (Bill of Rights, 1689), t. 2, & 2 W. & M., St. I. (Ecclesiastical Patronage, W. & M., St. I. (Distress, 1690), t. 5
pr.
S3. 2, 3,
5"
729
83 411
1689),
c.
26, ss.
...
,
4 W.
4
&
& 5 11 692), c. & 5 7 & 8 W. III. (Mortmain, 1695), t. 37 7 & 8 W. III. (Wills, 1695), c. 38 8 & 9 Will. III. (Prevention of Frivolous and Vexatious 10 & II Will. m. (Child e oere, 1698), c. 22 2 & 3 Anne (Wills, 1703), c. 5 16 4 & 5 Anpe (Amendment of Law, 1705), c.
4
ss. 9,
s. s.
M. (Mortgages, 1692), c. 16, s. 3 W. & M. fWills, 1692), c. 2 W. & M. (Expiring Laws Continuance,
815,817
.
1184
24,
S.
Suits, 1696),
c.
10
50,
13
a. .
14 17
652 118,988 50
27
74 319
Digitized
by Microsoft
XXIV
TABLE OF STATUTES
PAGE
c.
Anne {Cestui Que Vie Act, i/o/), 7 Anne (Diplomatic Privileges Act, g Anne (Landlord and Tenant Act,
6
583 341
1709),
c.
18
13
13
5
c.
13
1718),
:.
Geo.
8,
1181,
II
ran
1184 628
Geo
I.
4 Geo,
II.
I
London, 1724), t. 18, ss. 17, 18 (Landlord- and Tenant Act, 1730), c. 28
(Custom
s. I
of
634, 764
s.
II
II
Geo Geo
II.
c. c.
.,
Rent Act,
1737),
17 19
627 729
83, 973
s. S.
,s.
2 10
II
15
s.
,{,()^.
16
18
s. s. s.
19
20
1738), 1739),
c.
384
28
19
c.
c.
....
.
3" 3"
1378
384, 533 3JI
c. c.
38
8 Geo.. II.
.
(Gaming Act,
24 Geo. 24 Geo,
II.
II.
1744), c. 34 (Calendar (New Style) Act, 1750), (Constables Protection Act, 1750), s. 6
....
.
23,
s.
71
44
343 74 688 31 80
31 Geo. II. (Weight and Price of Bread, 1758), 9 Geo. III. (Crofrn Suits Act, 1769), t. 16
s.
,29
ss. 3,
c.
48
304, 38
304
14 Geo. III. (Fires. Prevention (Metropolis) Act, 1774),
s.
s.
c.
78
192, 306,
1 1
83
20
68
86
406
33 Geo. III. (Acts of Parliament (Commencement) Act, 1793), c, 13 35 GeOi III. (Heji'Apparent's Establishment, Act, 1795), c. 125, 9 38 Geo. III. (Administration of Estates Act, 1798), c. 87, s. 6 75" 39 & 40 Geo. III. (Accumulations Act, 1800), c. 98
s.
[
. . .
74
1331 1081, 1082 1080, 1081 1082
51 Geo. III.
55 Geo. III.
2 (Marriage of Lunatics Act, 181 1), c. 37 (Wills Act, 18 1 5), c. 192 (Deserted Tenements Act, 1817), c. 52 (Poor Relief Act, 1819), c. 12, ss. 24, 25
8.
1171
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
4 deo. IV. (Marriage Act,
s.
xxv
1823),
c.
76
ss. 3,
s. S.
9 10
XXVI
TABLE OF STATUTES
IV. (Prescription Act, 1832),
c.
&
3 Will.
71
TABLE OF STATUTES
3
xxvu
&
c.
74 (contd.)
33 35
36, 37
567
569 567
571
8-34
s-
564, 565
83 s. 8.
38 39 41
42,
897
88.
8.
9.
44
568
45
907
568 571 589
589, 752
46 47 88. 50-52
ss.
t>.
53
54
8.
60 77
&
94
4
5
72,73 77
75
3 3 3
Will. IV. (Bank of England Act, 1833), c. 98, 3. 6 108 Will. IV. (Administration ot Estates Act, 1833), c. 104 752, 1297, 1326, 1327, 1369, 1370, 1372, 1373, 1401 . 4 Will. IV. (Dower Act, 1833), t. 105 752, 1 184, 1319, 1324 8. 2 1319
..
3.3
s.
4
5
8. 5.
=,.
1319,
6 7
9
ss
8.
,
10, II
12
&
c.
106
554:
3
8. 8.
4
5
ss
a.
,6-8
.
& 4
4 4
SS II, 12 Will. IV. (1833), No. 27 (Thellusson's Will) 5 Will. IV. (Apportionment Act, 1834), c. 22 5 Will. IV. (Friendly Societies Act, 1834), c. 40,
1318 1321 1324 1321 1321 1324 1322 1325 1266 1318 1301 1299 1299 1300 13 1302 1301 1302 1304 1081
997
=.
12
378
5 Will.
IV. (Poor
s. 8.
Law Amendment
. . . .
Act, 1834),
.
c.
76^1210 1213
313 443
1
57
71
5 5 5
(Gaming Act, 1835), c. 41, ss. 1-2 6 Will. IV. fHighway Act, 1835), c. 50, s. 79 6 Will. IV. (Marriage Act, 1835), '^- 54i 3- 2. 7 Will. IV. (Durham (County Palatine) Act, 1836),
6 Will. IV.
172
c.
19
686
Digitized
by Microsoft
XXVlll
TABLE OF STATUTES
TABLE OF STATUTES
I I I
XXIX
PAGE
2 Vict. (Tithe Act, 1838), c. 64, ss. i, 3, 4 2 Vict. (Small Tenements Recovery Act, 1838), 2 Vict. (Judgments Act, 1838), c. no
3.
s. 8.
735
c.
74,
s. i
634
II
725, 752 863, 1059, 1152 971, 1055, 1056 863, 1 1 52 1056, 1 1 52
12
13
. .
9.
14
17
=15
s.
1056 117
&
& & &
2
z
3
(Metropolitan PoKce Act, 1839), c. 478. 14 s. 63 3 Vict, (Tithe Act, 1839), "- ^^i '^- > 7 3 Vict. (Metropolitan Police Courts Act, 1839), 4 Vict, (Parliamentary Papers Act. 1840), c. 9 88. I, 2
3 Vict.
.
634 443
^-
s-
39
735 533
5'3 514 1 166 1056
4
4
4 4 4
5
6 7
8-3. Vict. (Marriage Act, 1840), c. 72, ss. 1,2 Vict. (Judgments Act, 1840), c. 82 Vict. (Metropolitan Pohce Courts Act, 1840), c. 84, Vict. (Infant Felons Act, 1840), t. 90, . i Vict. (Loan Societies Act, 1840), c. no, a. i Vict. (School Sites Act, 1841), c. 38, 3. 5 Vict. (Copyright Act, 1842), c. 45, s. 15 Vict. (Limitation of Actions Act, 1 843), u. 54, s. 3 Vict. (Libel Act, 1843), t. 96
.
s.
13
633 1222
341 1233
1
426
79
s.
7 7
& &
2 8 Vict. (Poor
s.
Law Amendment
,
8 Vict.
(Duchy
8.
7
8
&
&
71 8 Vict. (Joint Stock Companies Act, 1844), '^- "> ^- ^ 9 Vict. (Companies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845), c. 16
ss.
848
lOOI
II, 15, 1000.
6-g
15
....
ion, 1070
16,
lOOI
ss. 14,
8. 9. s. 8.
s,
16
29 38 45
61
<^-
&
69
'
&
......
,
. .
1362 590
c,
"
78.79 -97
ss.
8
8
& &
9 Vict. (Libe! Act, 1845), c. 75, s. 2 9 Vict. (Real Property Act, 1845), c. 106
8. 3
....
Digitized
s-4
635
by Microsoft
XXX
&
TABLE OF STATUTES
c.
106 (contd.)
6
7 8
.
652, 796
.
.
...
. .
94, 95
9
.
663 627
39:
ss. i
8 8
8
(Gaming Act, 1845), t. 109, s. 18 9 Vict. (Satisfied. Terms Act, 1845), <^- "2, 9 Vict. (Inclosure Act, 1845), c. 1 18
9 Vict.
.
3"
638 68g
9 9
s. Ill 9 Vict. (Small Debts Act, 1845), c. 127, s. 8 10 Vict. (Tithe Act, 1846), c. 73 10 Vict. (Fatal Accidents Act, 1846), c. 93 s. 2
634
971 735 363, 371 448 363
....
. .
s. 5
9 & 10 Vict. (Public Money Drainage Act, 1846), c. loi 10 & II Vict. (Public Money Drainage Act, 1847), c. 11 10 & II Vict. (Markets and Fairs Clauses Act, 1847), c. 14 10 & II Vict. (Waterworks Clauses Consolidation Act, 1847), 10 10
11
897 897
t.
17,
c.
s.
6gs 188
II Vict.
58
"55.
1156 1159 342 890 8go
12
e.
44
ss. 2, 4,
7
ss. g,
i
13 Vict. (Poor Law Amendment Act, 1849), u. 103, 14 Vict. (Leases Act, 1850), c. 17, ss. 2, 3 14 Vict. (Landlord and Tenant Act, 1851), c. 25, s. 14 Vict, (sheriff of Westmoreland Act, 1850), c. 30
73
8go
i
& &
14 Vict. (Trustee Appointment Act, 1850), c. 60 14 Vict. (County Court Act, 1850), c. 61, s. 11 14 Vict. (Liberties Act, 1850), c. 105 15 Vict. (Prevention of Offences Act, 1851), c. ig, s. 15 Vict. (Landlord and Tenant Act, 1851), c. 25 s. 2 16 Vict. (Wills Act Amendment Act, 1852), c. 24 16 Vict. (Common Law Procedure Act, 1852), i,. 76
422 686
443 788
971 1238
......
. .
. . .
15
17
& &
& &
49 s. 210 s. 212 16 Vict. (Chancery Procedure Act, 1852), c. 86, 18 Vict. (Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1854),
s-
......
s.
45
31
c.
ss. 1,
256
257, 258
17 17 17 17
18 Vict (Usury Laws Repeal Act, 1854), c. go. 18 Vict. (Literary and Scientific Institutions Act, 1854),
s-
116 6
1233 1396 388
& &
18 Vict, (Real Estates Charges Act, 1854), c. 113 18 Vict (Common Law Procedure Act, 1854), c. 125
s. s.
78 189
iS 18
& &
ss. 214, 218 19 Vict. (Judgments Act, 1855), c. 15 ig Vict. (Infants Settlement Aci, 1855),
ss. I, 2,
.....
c.
43
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
i8
XXXI
&
& & &
....
. . .
c.
iii
...
.
944, 983
s. 3
19 ig 19
20 Vict. (Public Money Drainage Act, 1856), c. 9 20 Vict. (Administration of Intestates' Estates Act, 1856), 20 Vict. (Mercantile Law Amendment Act, 1856), c. 97 3.3
944 897
>305
c.
94
loi, 291,
5.9
,.
=
13
ig
&
'4 2
1856),
9
"59.
1:60,
161,
1
164
s.
.
4
5
1 1
60
8.6
s. s.
s.
9 17
19
163
161
ScHed. Schcd.
ig
A
B
it6o
1
160,
20
& &
20 Vict. (Settled Estates Act, 1856), c. 120, . 23 21 Vict. (Court of Probate Act, 1857), c. 77
s.
1360
4
70, 71
;.K.
1329
1
SS.
s-
341
73
77, 78
'
ss.
s.
'35"
20
&
c.
85
7
16
17 21
"93, ",94
1
193,
197 1201
29,
1199, 1316
22 S. 25 S. 26 5.27
SS.
s.
"94
2g, iig7, 1316
1
28, 30
31
32 s-33 s-35
s.
29,
187,
.
47
122:
45
59
1202
1
57
s.
196
464, 470
21
22 Vict. (Chancery
s.
Amendment
Act, 1858),
.
>..
27
1016
373, 558
2
c.
21 21
22 Vict. (Jews Relief Act, 1858), c. 49 22 Vict. (Stipendiary Magistrates' Act, 1858),
s. s.
I
730
73
633, 634
21 21
2 . 22 Vict. (Legitimacy Declaration Act, 1858), 22 Vict. (Court of Probate Act, 1858), c. 95 s. 16
s.
.
634
c.
93, ss.
i, 6,
1209
1333 1341 1347
18
s.
19
Digitized
by Microsoft
xxxii
TABLE OF STATUTES
PAGE
i;.
21
&
108^
....
'
....
c. 31;
.
.
"99
1197,1199
ss.
8-10
"99
^34 740,1409, 1410
22 Vict. (Defence Act, 1859), c. 12, s. 5 22 & 23 Vict. (Law of Property Amendment Act, 18 59)j
.
ss. I,
s. s. . s. s. =. s.
~.
12
.........
.
-795
629 869 1409 1127 1409 838 1410 1299 1367 1390 1115
1221
14
15
16
17 18 19
27, 28
. . .
. .
838,
838, 1409, S54i i95)
. . .
s.
ss.
s. s.
29
31
22
&
4
5
23 23 23
"
c.
61
24 Vict. (Marriage (Society of Friends) Act, i860), c. 18, s. i 24 Vict. (Ecclesiastical Courts Jurisdicrion Act, i860), c. 32, 24 Vict. (Law of Property Amendment Act, i860), c. 38 s-3 ' ='6
11 55, 11
1202 56
ss. 2,
442
1375
794
. s.
7
13
I
. .
23 23 23 23 23
&
..-.
665 72
24 24 24 24 24
Vict.
Vict.
(Duchy
s.
of Cornwall (Limitation of
Time) Act,
i860),
Vict.
Vict.
(Game Licences Act, i860), c. 90, ss. 6-8 (Crown Debts and Judgments Act, i860),
.....848
115,
s.
c.
53,
c.
2
2
..........
.
.
ss. i,
24
861),
c.
62
....
.
1202
1186, 1191,
"92
31
80,
t.
ss. 2, 3
848 848
5
24
..........
. .
. .
96
420
443 443 443 775 438
24 24 24
s. 103 25 Vict. (Malicious Damage Act, 1861), t. 97, s. 61 25 Vict. (Coinage Offences Act, 1861), c. 99, s. 31 25 ^^ct. (Offences against the Person Act, 1861), t. 100 s- 42 s- 43
.8-45
24 &
25 Vict. (Wills Act, 1861),
ss1
c.
114
2
67,
ss.
i,
s-3
25
&
c.
48
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
j6
XXXlll
PAGE
&
& &
c.
41
.rnf
8-3 z6 26
27 Vict. ^Trustee Savings Banks Act, 1863), c. 87, 27 Vict. (Companies Clauses Act, 1863), c. 118.
s. 8.
s.
246 247
'4
1009,
13
22 23
ss. 25.
s.
26.
27 27 27 27 27 27 27 28 28 28
& & & & & & & & & &
28 28 Vict. (Naval Prizes Act, 1864), c. 25 28 Vict. (Army Prize (Shares of Deceased) Act, 1864), c, 2S Vict. (Matrimonial Causes Act, 1864), c. 44, s. i 28 Vict. (Admiralty Lands and Works Act, 1864), c. 57. 28 Vict. (Fatal Accidents Act, 1864), c. 95 28 Vict. (Judgments Act, 1S64), c. 112, s. 4
28 Vict. (Improvement of
lOIO
937
36:
1 1
s.
341 199
Land Act, 1864), c. 114 29 Vict. (Navy and Marines (Wills) Act, 1865), c. 72 29 Vict. (Naval and Marine Pay and Pensions Act, 18^5), 29 Vict. (Mortgage Debenture Act, 1865), c. 78
88s-
27, 33
.
37 Sched.
28 28
& &
&
.III
29
29 Vict. (Carriers Act Amendment Act, 1865), c. 94, s. 1 lii, 29 Vict. (Navy and Marines (Property of Deceased) Act, 865), s. 6 30 Vict. (Matrimonial Causes Act, 1866), c. 32 tv:, .fjiV
1
Hil
1200
186, 1191
s-3
Land by Auction Act, 1867), c. 48, Vict. (Real Estate Charges Act, 1867), c. 69, s. i Vict. (Railway Companies Act, 1867), c. 127, s. 4
Vict. (Sale of
.
31 Vict. (Policies of Assurance Act, 1867), c. 144 32 Vict. (Sales of Reversions Act, 1867), c. 4 32 Vict. (Partition Act, 1868), c. 40
ss.
s.
3-S
,li.t-!!,-
8
1868),
..
31 31 31
31 31
32 32 32 32 32
Vict.
54
;/
Vict.
32
32
33 Vict.
Act, 1868), c. 77, s. 4 (Policies of Assurance Act, 1868), c. 86 (Larceny Act, 1868), c. 116, s. i (Poor Law Amendment Act, 1868), c. 122, s 33 (Administration of Estates Act, 1869), c. 46
.
Amendment
192 397 971 305 36 587 1086 1360 323 1 196 305
5
8.4
s. 5
.... ....
c.
62
'
367
1
1422
32
&
986
c.
71
953
108
31
1009, lOIO
.
33 Vict. (Coinage Act, 1870), c. 10, ss. 4-1 33 & 34 Vict. (NaturjJization Act, 1870), c. H, 33 & 34 Vict. (Mortgage Debenture (Amendment) Act, 1870),
' .
s.
4
I
33
&
....
c.
lOIO
23
692, 918
.
1256
Digitized
by Microsoft
kkxiv
'
TABLE OF STATUTES
PAGE
Act,' 1870), c.
33
':
&
34 Vict. (Forfeiture
ss. 6,
s. S.
fe.
23
{contd.)
9 10
12
Ss.
I3-18
^25
.
.
33
33
& &
s. 30 34 Vict. (Wages Attachment Abolition Act, 1870)^ t. 30, . 34 Vict. (ApportionmiSnt Act, 1870), c, 35
.
s. s. s.
2
3
......
s.
.
20,918 977
21
21; 918,
97^
at
977'
9l8j 97?
.
.
....
.
'
>
.'
1355
ss. 6,
'
'997
.
33
33
34 34
34 Vict. (National Debt Act, 18701)^ c. 71^ ^. Si 22 s. 23 34 Vict. (Elementary Education Act, 1870), c. 75, 35 Vict. (Bank Holidays Act, 1871), c. 17, ss. i, 2 35 Vict. (Trade Union Act, 1871), c. 31 s. 4
. .
.
s.
'
S.
12
34 34 34
35 35 35
....
5
35 Vict. (Incumbents Resignation Act, 1871), c. 44, s. 10 35 Vict. (Lodgeirs'Gbods Protection Act, 1871), c. 79, s. 7 35 Vict. (Prfeventi6n Of Crimes Act, 1871), c. 112, s. 7 36 Vict. (Marriage (Society of Friends) Act, 1872), c. 10, s. i 36 Vict. (Bastardy Laws Amendment Act, 1872), c. 65, ss. 4, 36 Vict; (Metalliferous Mines Regulation Act, 1872), c. 77
999
83
"
s.g
s.
.'
38
c.
35
93
s.
s.
24 34
'
35 36
36
36
36
36 Vict. (Licensing Act, 1872), c. 94, s. 12 37 Vict. (Bastardy Laws Amendment Act, 1873), c. 9, s. 5 37 Vict. (Custody of Infants Act, 1873), c. 12, s. 2 37 Vict. (Matrimonial Causes Act, 1873), c. 31, s. i 37 Vict. (Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873), c, 66
s-3
s.
"87, 1347
16
'329
36
37
592) "49 s. 48, 375* 553, 558. 563, 576, 626, 842, 935, 1023, 1048, 1049, 1050, 1093, 1146 37 Vict. (Salmon Fishery Act, 1873), c. 71, s. 38 444 38 Vict. (Powers of Appointment Act, 1874), c. 37 875
s.
24 25
37
874
c.
42
5
7
9
rKi
lOOI
37
&
s. I
.......
c.
57
72, 766,
1342 1384
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
37
xxxv
PAGE
(contd.)
&
c.
57
'
c.
37
37
....
62 78
75
2I>
24
c.
38 38 38 38
2 39 Vict. fPublic Health Act, 1875), t. 55, s. 256 39 Vict. (Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1875),
3.
........
.
. .
1^2,
.
193 129
534
c.
77,
10
&
&
c.
86
.8-3
39 Vict. (Land Transfer Act, 1875), s. 22
8.
483 485
c.
87
816 819 818 819 818 450 1028
587 1086
1338 1338 6
13
3. s.
23 25
26
.........
1875), 1875),
c. c.
38 38
39
39
40 39 Vict. (Employers and Workmen Act, 39 Vict. (Trade Marks Registratiori Act, 40 Vict. (Partition Act, 1876), c. 17
s.
90,
a.
10
.
91
8.
c.
18
8-2
8.
9
.
39 39 39
(Trade Union (Amendment) Act, 1876), c. 22 (Industrial and Provident Societies Act, 1876), c. 45, s. 17 (Divided Parishes and Poor Law Amendment Act, 1876),
. .
.
c.
s. s.
61
18
39
&
4
II
48 34 46
40
....
.
1212 1213
'213
79
c i8
.
....
. .
1214 1213
40 40
41 41
41 Vict. (Contingent Remainders Act, 1877), c. 33 41 Vict. (Real Estate Charges Act, 1877), c. 34
.
8.
42 Vict. (Matrimonial Causes Act, 1878), 42 Vict. (Bills of Sale Act, 1878), c. 31 8-4
8.
c.
.
1396 1397 1202 19, s. 3 939, 940, 941, 942, 949, 950, 1052 941, 942, 950, 95> 1052 941, 951
. . . .
...
Digitized
by Microsoft
XXXVl
&
TABLE OF STATUTES
(Bills
3s. 9,
s. s.
41
42 Vict.
c.
31
{contd.)
10
16
941 951
20
41 41 41
42 43 43
& 42 Vict. & 42 Vict. & 42 Vict. & 43 Vict. & 44 Vict. & 44 Vict.
(Innkeepers Act, 1878), c. 38, s. i (Tithe Act, 1878), c. 42, ss. i, 3, 4, 5 (Debtors Act, 1878), c. 54, s. i (Civil Procedure Acts Repeal Act, 1879), c. 59 (Statutes (Definition of Time) Act, 1880), c. g (Employers' Liability Act, 1880), c. 42
.
:
3. I
448
448, 450
2 s-3
s.
s. .
4
s
6,7
s.
43
44
& &
44
Vict.
45 Vict.
41
739. 800,
1
816,
129,
130
2
3
5
6go, 821
193, 194 822, 994
8.6
ss. 7, a. 10
a. 9.
II
12 14 16 17 18 19
50:
s.
ss. 15,
s. s. s. s.
S. S.
20
21
s. S. s. s. s. s.
s-
22 23
24
25 30
36
38
39
690 189 621, 628, 629 628, 629 629 549; 6^71 797, 798, 801 835 832, 833 755, 821, 826, 834 821, 822, 823, 826 825 822, 825, 1403 190 . 826 823,825 827, 829 1 106, 1 148, 1352, 1403 1 132 1136 931, 1185
18, 677, 678,
.
s. s. s.
40
41
903,
1
1
24
884, 902
30, II 34,
42 =43 8.44
8.4s 8. 47 s. 50 3.51 8. 52 3. 56 a. 59
1233
"35
993
60,
741, 839
242 905 555, 556, 562, 580 871, 906, 976 1114,1131
.
.
1371
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
44
XXXVll
&
61
........
Law
c.
t.
41
.
{conld.)
190, 1091
65 58-
639, 904, 97
.
44
&
129
88.
8. 8.
8. 8.
41, 45 141
45 45
& &
46 Vict. (Inferior Courts Judgments Extension Act, 1882), c. 31 323 46 Vict. (Settled Land Act, 1882), t. 38 755. 897. i232> 1233 8. z 878, 88z, 883, 884, 892, 896 8-3 605, 871, 878, 1085 8.6 879 608, 879 s. 10 890 8. IZ ss. 13, 14 879 880 s. 18
.
8. . s. 8.
ZI
zz
Z3 Z5
894
880, 896 888, 896
s.
8.
a.
8.
26 28 29 3
31
879, 896
8.
8-35 s-37
=..38
s. s.
40
45 50
51
190
891, 893
8.47
s.
880
44, 887
883, 886
S3.
52
.
-53 . 54
88. 56,
s. 8. s. s. 8. s.
887
57
58 59 60
61
881 887 878; 882, 884, 886, 897, 1314 878, 884
.
62
63
I
45
&
46
Vict.
(Conveyancing Act,
s.
39
6 9
10
II
ss. 8,
s. s. 8.
12
83s
45
&
46 Vict.
(Bills of Sale
1882),
c.
43
949, 950,
2
3
-950
s.
950, 952
Digitized
by Microsoft
XXXVlll
TABLE OF STATUTES
PAGE
(Bills of Sale
a.
45
&
46 Vict.
c.
43
'(contd.)
4
6 7
8
ss. ;,
s. s. s. s. s.
95 951
9 12 13
ss. 14, I
s.
s.
16
45
&
951, 1052
950
c,
61
416, 980
.
9
13
=
s. s. s.
14 23 38
69 118 69 68
63
420
.
s.
s-
s.
57 59 62 63
=
s.
64
c.
45
&
I
.
ss. 2, 5
S.
S. .
585, 844, 75 855, 934, 1087, 1 102, 1 1 84 29, 348, 904, 975, 1072, 1256, 1323 94, 1315, 1316, 1323
II
12
13
s.
s. s. S.
14
19
.
58,
'.
20
21
.
1212, 1213
.
s.
s.
23
24
c.
1317 1106
46 46 46
3^
47,
8.
226
Law
49
1342
377,389
377, 389
c.
46
47
Vict.
52
1
20 30
367 919
146
s. s. s. s.
s.
44 47 49
54 56
125 146
919,952
860 953 919 919 139
97?
. s.
s.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
46
XXXljt
PAGE
&
t.
52
{contd.)
mf,(ii)ioi
47
&
8.7
s.
47 47
& &
...
c.
18
882 884
lOOI
1
48 Vict. (Chartered Companies Act, 1884), c. 56 48 Vict. (Matrimonial Causes Act, 1884), c. 68 i. z
8.
8.
180, I20I
.
180
4
6
3
I20I
8. 5 3.
"88,
t.
193 I22I
47
&
71
1
674, 753
72, 80 103, 1326
8.4
48
1338
&
& &
49 Vict. (Criminal
8.
Law Amendment
Act, 1885),
t.
69
189, 1222
.
12
49 49
50 Vict. (Marriage Act, 1886), c. 14, s. i 50 Vict. (Guardianship of Infants Act, 1886), 8. 2
8.
>
s.
4
6
s. 5 =.
8.7
49
&
c.
27
1223 1 167 1219 I162, 1215, I22I, 1228 1162, I217, 1219, 1234 I162, I217, 1234 44". 1217 1 162, 1221 7 1222
.
.
c.
54
734 736 734 1342 225
625 1327
531
50 50 50
50 50
51 Vict. (Savings Banks Act, 1887), c. 40, s. 3 51 Vict. (Truck Act, 1887), c. 46, ss. 2, 10 51 Vict. (Allotments and Cottage Gardens (Compensation for Crops)
. Act, 1887), c. 26 Vict. (Escheat (Procedure) Act, 1887), Vict. (Sheriffs Act, 1887), c. 55
& 51 & 51
c.
53,
s.
8.
16
19
8.
8.
8,
28 29
8-34
50
51 Vict. (Coal
8. s,
I I
c.
58
50 50
51
51
70 51 Vict. (Superannuation Act, 1887), c, 67, 51 Vict. (Copyhold Act, 1887), c. 73, s. 4 32 Vict. (Glebe Lands Act, i888), c. 20
s.
226 452
s.
.....
.
52 Vict.
(Law
8.
of Distress
Amendment
Act, 188
51 51
52 Vict. (Marriage Validation Act, 1888), c. 28 52 Viet. (Local Government Act, 1888), c. 41
Digitized
by Microsoft
xl
TABLE OF STATUTES
PAGE
51
&
888),
c.
42
751
2
3
4
5
10
13
8.
51
&
'
s. 5 s.
s.
910
99 865, 910
914, 91 s
43
686, 691
35 50
....
.
.
=51 s- 52 s. 56
s.
=>
'
63
... ...
'
s.
.
147 148
151
.
s.
1375 53 530 530 53 478 323 97i> 972. 105s 1056 323, 864
51 51
51 51
52 52 52 52
'
"
c. 51, s. 5 864 Vict. (Trustee Act, 1888), c. 59, s. 8 . . 74, 76, 77, 1145, 1146, 1421 Vict. (Preferential Payments in Bankruptcy Act, 1888), c. 62. 1377, 1388 Victi (Law of Libel Amendrftent Actj 1888), c. 64
Vict.
s.
s.
4
6
........
'
516 523
52
c.
30
Sched.
52 52 52
I
I
.
S3 Vict. (Factors Act, 1889), c. 45, s. 3 53 Vict. (Regulation of Raflways Act, 1889), 53 Vict. (Interpretation Act, 1889),
s. s.
c.
57,
s.
c.
63
19
17,69 556
68 1376
s.
36 38
53
&
<'.>.
53
&
54 Vict. (Lunacy Act, 1890), c. 5s. 108 s. 116 ss. 120, 124 ss. 125, 126 54,Vict. (Intestates' Estates Act, 1890), ss. 1-3
.
29
1318
1318, 1325
.
"'
53
&
c.
39
1318 1090
8. s.
S-3
S.
4
55,
.
8.5 8.6
8S. 7,
s.
8.
!
9 10
SS. II,
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
53
xli
&
c.
39
{contd.)
xlii
TABLE OF STATUTES
55 Vict. (Stamp Act, 189 1),
54
&
54 54
& &
.....
c.
39
{contd.)
304
109
Women
504
89 0.
<:
73
909,
751
s-3
s. s.
5 6 7 9
1892),
c. 9, s.
i
s.
ss. 8,
55 55
& &
56 Vict. 56 Vict.
(Gaming Act,
s. s.
I
(Conveyancing and
2
Law
50,
s-3
s.
Law Revision Act, 1892), c. i Vict. (Foreign Marriage Act, 1892), c. 23, ss Vict. (clergy Discipline Act, 1892), c. 32
Vict. (Statute Vict. (Accumulations Act, 1892),
I
,
1-22
.....
c.
58
^^- ^'
....
II
.
814
c.
39-
56 56
&
25-27 57 Vict. (Elementary Education (Blind and Deaf Children) Act, 1893),
ss.
.
'
1342
c.
42,
s.
1214
c.
&
53
,
-893,1115
2
3
4
893,
s. 5
s.
1 1
893 17
6
893)
.
'893
=.7
s. s.
"i5> "16
1117, iii8
.
9 10
II
1118
1
892, 892,
107,
108,*
mo,
s. S.
s.
109,
12
13
892,
. .
s. s. =. s. s. s. S. S. s. s.
14
15
17 18 19
1 1
14,
1119,
1
124,
190,
20
21
"33.
872,
1
22 23
136,
1137 1 136 1149 112S 1128 1129 1132 1131 1 127 1 132 1411 1414
24
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
56
xliii
&
c.
53
{conti.)
8.25
xliv
TABLE OF STATUTES
57 Vict. (Sale of Goods Act,
56
&
TABLE OF STATUTES
58 58
xlv
PAGE
& &
59 Vict. fMortgagees' Legal Costs Act, 1895), c. 2$ 59 Vict. (Summary Jurisdiction (Married Women) Act, 1895),
.
.
.1125
39
.
c.
1189
s-
1181, 1198
1181, 1198, 1199, 1316
1
'
8-5 3-6
59
198
&
a-
>
1198,1199
304 1378
5
u.
25
56. 57
ss.
8.
62-67 84
..........
.
....
59
&
3
c.
304, 308
59
&
5-6
35
59 59 60
60
60 Vict. 60 Vict.
61 Vict. 61 Vict.
1137 3-1 11", 1123, 1125, 1137, 1142 8. 3 1146 (Truck Act, 1896), c. 44, 88. 1-4 225 (Stannaries Court (Abolition) Act, 1896), t. 45, s. i 266 (Navy and Marines (Wills) Act, 1897), c. 15 1244 (Land Transfer Act, 1897), c. 65 578, 751, 867, 1338, 1370,
..........
. . . .
.
8.
s. s.
8. 3.
s.
2
3
1371, 1372, 1373. 1380, 1385, 1386, 1392) "409. '4" 190, 554, 571, 579, 753, 804, H27, 1 148, 1261, 1303, 1349, 1352, 1362, 1385, 1406 554, 838, 1327, 1337, 1338, 1343, 1361, 1370,
'371. 1373, 1398, 1407 1268, 1269, 1270, 1296, 1303, 1363, 1371, 1384
816
9 16
20
I
61
&
8-5 8-7
8.
12
I
61
61
&
......... .........
. . . . . .
t.
48
731
c.
55
.911
730 724
911
&
u.
58
11 57
8-5 6
8. 8.
"S6
.
14
15
I
62 62 62 62 63
&
& & & &
63 Vict. (Commons Act, 1899), c. 30 63 Vict. (Elementary Education (Defective and Epileptic Children) Act, 1899), c. 32', s. II . 63 Vict. (Improvement of Land Act, 1899), c. 46 64 Vict. (Land Charges Act, 1900), c. 26 s. 2
. . .
......... ..........
.
.
1156,1158,1171 I156
.
II7I
lo, 14
c.
20
910 689
.
1214 897
864
'376
s.
Digitized
by Microsoft
xlvi
TABLE OF STATUTES
64 Vict. (Money Lenders Act, 1900),
s.
I
63
I
&
.....
c.
.
.
51
(Larceny Act, 1901), c. 10 (Factory and Workshop Act, 1901), 136 (Cremation Act, 1902), c. 8 (Musical (Summary Proceedings) Copyright Act, 1902),
.
.
c.
5'
s-
3
c.
28,
s.
c.
39,
c.
(Pre-ention of Cruelty to Children Act, 1904), (Railway Fires Act, 1905), c. 11 (Trade Marks Act, 1905), c. 15
15,
s.
12 28
s-3
TABLE OF STATUTES
6
xlvil
PAGE
Edw. VII.
c.
55
. .
. .
1106 133^
.
8-2
8- S
.1111
1
'
109,
1 1
10
'^
8> s.
"10,1332,1336,1338
. .
13
'
125 ,123
1
1906),
c.
58
58,
473
^2 "3 8-5 ^6
"7
'8
9
'3.
7 idw. VII. (Matrimonial Causes Act, 1907), t. 12, s. i 7 Edw. VII. (Married Women's Property Act, 1907), c.
s.
I
,,,!:
364,365,457,458,461,462
. . . .
8.3.
7 Edw. VII. (Limited Partnerships Act, 1907), t. 24, 7 Edw. VII. (Patents and Designs Act, 1907), c. 29
ss.
s. s.
1-4
5
ss.
8.
7-13
14 17 25
s.
a.
9.
s.
8.
s.
26 27 28
33 34 36
0.
s. s.
37
38
S. 49 8-53 8-54 3.
55
ss. 56,
8.
57
s.
8. s.
59 60
61
93
8. 97 7 Edw. VII. (Education (Administrative Provisions) Act, 1907), 7 Edw. VII. (Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage Act, 1907), c. 47
....... ......... ......... ......... ........ ........ ......... ......... ......... ........ ........ ......... ...... ......... ..... ... ......... ........ .........
18
a.
1200
1
106
29,907
1368
927, 1020
.
1016
1015, 1016
1015, 1016
.
1020 1016
426
427, IO16
c.
1023 1020 1021 1020 1022 1023 1015, 1020 IO16 1214 43, s. 14
. .
8.
a. 5.
-s-
2
3
5
..........
.
.1173
1
1173,
188
174
174,
.
188, 1196
"73
1907),
c.
50,
8.
16
1014
Digitized
by Microsoft
xlviii
TABLE OF STATUTES
c. 7, s. 1
8 8
8 8
Edw. VII. (Fatal Accidents (Damages) Act, 1908), Edw. VII. (Naval Marriages Act, 1908), c. 26, s. i Edw. VII. (Married Women's Property Act, 1908),
s.
I
Edw. VII.
......
c.
c.
27
28
1-9 10
II
371 1158 1184 1212 619, 788, 908 625 360, 625 625
620, 625, 755
12
15
,
I
ss. 13,
:
S.
s.
20
21
..
'
(j;j.
',
,
s.
s.
i.;
;-
s. a.
s.
22 26 28 29 3p
33
s.
s.
.
46
8
8
Edw. Edw.
Sched. II. Sched.,IV, VII. (Old Age Pensions Act, 1908), c. 40, 3. 6 VII. (Local Authorities (Admission of the Press to Meetings) Act,
1908),
c.
43,
3.
8 8
Edw. VII. (Lunacy Act, 1908), c. 47, s. i Edw. VII. (Law of Distress Amendment Act.
3. I S.
!
1908),
c.
53
533j 972,
83
11K'.
"49
1
3.4
...
c.
(,-f
Edw. VII.
58 75 134
c.
69
972,
325, 981, 1000, 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1009, lOIO, IOI3, 1070, I07I, 1072
s. I
s. s.
5,
266
s. s. s. s.
22 23 25
27
28
29 s-33 s-37
s.
41
s.
3. S.
59
81
1408 1004 1001 1006 1004 1367 1004 1002, 1004 1003 1008 1002
. .
84
93
,103
=
s. 3. S.
951,
105 121
1013 lOOI
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
8
xlix
c.
69 (contd.
123 IZ9
s.
8. 8. B.
8. 8.
8.
88.
8.
Sched.
Town
44-
14
IS
c.
9 Edw. VII. (Assurance Companies Act, 1909), I & 2 Geo. V. (Conveyancing Act, 1911), c. 37
2 s-3
8.
49,
s.
36
8.4
8.
10
12
S.
14
I
I I
V. (Moneylenders Act, 191 1), c. 38 V. (Lunacy Act, 1911), c. 40, s. i V. (Copyright Act, 191 1), c. 46
8
TABLE OF STATUTES
I
&
1), c,
46 {contd.}
Ti^
25
LIO!
,','
'
s. s.
26 28
29, 30 31
.
ss.
. s.
2 Geo.
3 Geo. 5 Geo.
5
Geo.
35 Sched. I. . V. (Finance Act, 1911), c. 48, s. 17 V. (Trade .Union Act, 1913), c.'30 V. (Affiliation Orders Act, 1914), c. 6, ss, i, 3 V. (British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act,
5.
1043 1043 1044 1043 427, 1034, 1046 1032, 1034, 1043 1636 1004 6 1213
914),
17:
17
974
c.
&
59
't.o'J
1389
1066,
.
s.
7
18
s. s.
rfrt
s.
28 30
31
'Jf
239
s-33
s.
-!
1
.!!(
.S
34 S.3S s. 36 s-37 s. 38 s. 40 s. 42 s. 44 s. 45 s. 47
s. s.
219
; . .
860, 969,
859, 860, 969, 970, 982, 990, 1053, 1066,
1
106,
149,
239, 860;
SI
999
52
53
<p+
5'5
idf
46, 1185
s-
S-.S4
s. .
977
s.
s.
125 129
130'
HI 5
151 7
7 7
7
8 Geo. V. (Wol-'kmen's
c.
1377, 42.
&^
8 Geo. V. (Fiiiahce Act, 1917), c. 31, s. 35 8 Geo. V. (Corri Production Act," 1917), c. 46, s. 9' Geo. V.' (Wills (Soldiers and Sailors) Act, 1918),'
s. 1
.
.
c.
'"'
8
S.3
s.
9 Geo. V. (Education Act, 1918), c. 39, s. 8 8 9 G60. V.' (Affiliation Orders Act; iqiS), c. 49, 9 &' 10 Geo. V. (Trade Marks Act, 1919), c. 79 ss. 1-4
"
.
& &
.......
s. i
.
c.
80
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF STATUTES
9
li
&
ss. 6,
8. s.
8 lo
S8.
14-16
&
c.
80
(contd.)
PAGE
1018 1016 . 1015 1017 379, 4z6, 1016, 1085 1020 1016, loig
iz
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
PAGi:
A. V. A. (1885) 19 Ir. R. Ch. 403 1177 A. . B. (1868) L. R. I P. & M. 559 17 W. R. 14 1177 A. and B., Re [1897] i Ch. 786 66 L. J. Ch. 592 C. A 1217 Abbiss V. Burney (1880) 17 Ch. D. 211 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 348 44 L. T. 267 29 W. R. 449 C. A 751, 752, 1074, 1075 Abbot, Re [1893] i Ch. 54 62 L. J. Ch. 46 ; 67 L. T. 794 41 W. R. 154 R- 7^ 1073 3 Abbot II. Weekly (1665) i Lev. 176 743, 746 Abbott 0. Macfie (1863) 2 H. & C. 744; 33 L. J.,Ex. 177 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 682 12 W. R. 315 403 Abbott V. Parfitt (1871) L. R. 6 Q. B. 346 ; 40 L. J. Q. B. 1 15 ; 24 L. T. 469 ; 19 W. R. 718 1363 Abercromby v. Fermoy Commissioners [1900] i Ir. R. 302 C. A. 746 Abraham v. Bubb (1680) 2 Freem. Ch. 53 792 Abrahams, Re [1908] 2 Ch. 69 77 L. J. Ch. 578 ; 99 L. T. 240 1276 Abrahams, Re [191 1] i Ch. 108 80 L. J. Ch. 83 ; 103 L. T. 532 54 Sol. Jo- 874 "35 Abrahams o. Deakin [1891] i Q. B. 516 60 L. J. Q. B. 238 63 L. T. 690 // 39 W. R. 183 ; 55 J. P. 212 C. A Abrath v. N. E. Ry. (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 440 C. A. ; affirmed, (1886) L. R. 1 1 App. Ca. 247 346, 55 L. J. Q. B. 457 ; 55 L. T. 63 ; 50 J. P. 659
; ; ; ;
......
;
.....
. . ; ;
.353
.
i P. & D. 636 ; Ackland v. Lutley (1839) 9 A. & E. 879 Ackroyd o. Smith (1850) 10 C. B. 164 19 L. J. C. P. 315 ; 14 Jur. 1047. ..670, 677 1102, 1358 Ackroyd v. Smithson (1780) t Bro. C. C. 502 3 P. W. 22 n. Acraman v. Cooper (1842) 10 M. & W. 585 419
; ; ; . .
62 L. J. Ch. 266 ; 68 L. T. 376 ; 41 W. R. 329 ; [1893] 1 Ch. 329 R. 222 Adams and Kensington Vestry, Re (1884) 27 Ch. D. 394 54 L. J. Ch. 87 51 L. T. 382; 32 W. R. 883 C. A Adams v. Adams [1892] i Ch. 369 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 237 ; 66 L. T. 98 ; 40 W. R.
Adams, Re
3
135
1354
991 Cheverel (1606) Cro. Jac. 113 1363 6 Bing. 656 ; 4 M. & P. 491 ; 8 L. J. (O. S ) C. P. v. Gibney (1830) 635 242 31 R. R. 514 506 Adams c. Kelly (1824) Ry. & Moo. 157 Adams v. Lanes. & Yorks. Ry. Co. (1869) L. R. 4 C. P. 739 ; 38 L. J. C P. 277; 20L. T. 850; 17W. R. 884 90 Adams v. Lindsell (;i8i8) i B. & Aid. 681 ; 19 R. R. 415 Adams v. Newbigging (1888) 13 App. Ca, 308 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 1066 ; 59 L. T 35 267 ; 37 W. R. 97 686 Adams 1). OsbaMeston (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 489 . . 1330 Adamson, In the Goods 0/(1875) L. R. 3 P. & M. 253 Adamson. Re [1913] W. N. 18 108 L. T. 179 ; 29 T. L. R. 233 ; 57 Sol. Jo. ^^246 j' affirmed W. N. 188 (218) 109 L. T. 25 29 T. L. R. 594 ; 57 Sol. . Jo. 610 C. A. Adamson v. Jarvis (1827) 4 Bing. 66 12 Moore C. P. 241 ; 5 L. J. (O. S.) 210, 237, 337 C. P. 68 ; 29 R. R. 503 Addams v. Ferick (1859) 26 Beav. 384 28 L. J. Ch. 594 ; 5 Jur. (N. S.) W 1395 S88
261C. A
0.
Adams Adams
-329
.
-99"
Digitized
by Microsoft
Kv
Adderly 607 Addison
v.
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Dixon (1824) 2
. .
24 R. R. 254
Sim.
&
S.
125
.
Overend (17^) 6 T. R. 766 Agjinoor's Trusts, Re (1895) 64 L. J. Ch. 521 Agard v. King (1600) Cro. Eliz. 775
0.
349 1306 13 R. 677 618, 645 Agar-Ellis, Re (1878) 10 Ch. D. 49 ; 48 L. J. Ch. i 27 W. R. 39 L. T. 380 1228,1229 117 C. A Agar-ElIis, Re (1883) 24 Ch. D. 317; 53 L. J. Ch. 10; 50 L. T. 161 32 ^ W. R. I C. A. 441, 1215, 1218, 1220, 1225, 1226 Agius o. G. W. Colliery Co. [1899] i Q. B. 413 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 312 ; 80 L. T. 122 140 47 W. R. 403 C. A Agnew V. Belfast Banking Co. [1896] 2 Ir. R. 204 C. A. 1290 Agiiew 0. Jobson (1877) i'3 Cox C. C. 625 432 Ailesbury (Earl) . Pattison (1778) I Dougl. 28 687 Ainsworth 11. Wildii^ [1905] i Ch. 435 74 L. J. Ch. 256 ; 92 L. T. 679 ; 53 820 W. R. 28T Akerman, Re [1891] 3 Ch. 212; 61 L. J. Ch. 34; 65 L. T. 194; 40 1276 W. R. 12 Alabaster v. Harness [1895] i Q. B. 339 64 L. J. Q. B. 76 71 L. T. 740 ; 43 W. R. 196 14 R. 54 496, 498 706 Albany". Brounsall (ji 609) Yelv. 163 AllTeinarle (Earl) o. Rogers (1796) 7 Bro. P. C. 522 728 L. R. 3 Q. B. Aldous . Cornwell (1868) 9 B. & S. 607 37 L. J. Q. B. 201 149 573 ; 16 W. R. 1045 Aldred's Estate, Re (1882) 21 Ch. D. 228 46 L. T. 379 51 L. J. Ch. 942 840 30 W. R. 777 Aldrich v. Cooper (1803) 8 Ves. 382 7 R. R. 86 836, 1399 Alexander v. Alexander (1755) 2 Ves. Sr. 640 876, 877 Alexander v. Jenkins [1892] i Q. B. 797 ; 61 L. J. Q. B. 377 ; 66 L. T. 391 ; 40 W. R. 202 9 Manson, 13. Alexander o. Mills (1870) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 124 ; 40 L. J. Ch. 73 24 L. T. 206; 19W. R. 310 873 ;. 11 Jur. Alexander o. N. E. Rv. Co. (i 865) 6 B. & S. 340 34 L. J. Q. B. 1 52 (N. S.)6i9; 13 W. R. 651 Sii Alexander v. Southey (1821) 5 B. & Aid. 247 24 R. R. 348 419 Alison. Re (1879) ii Ch. D. 284 40 L. T. 234 27 W. R. 537 Allan, ii (1881) 17 Ch. D. 807 50 L. J. Ch. 778 ; 44 L. T. 168 29 W. R. 1214 859 Allan . Gomme (1840) :i A. & E. 759 ; 3 Per. & Dav. 581 9 L. J. Q. B. 258 708 Allan V. Gott (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 439 41 L. J. Ch. 571 ; 26 L. T. 412 20 W. R. 427 1394, 1397 Allan V. Overseers of Liverpool (1874) L. R. 9 Q. B. 191 43 L. J. M. C. 69 ; 30 L. T. 93 22 W. R. 33b 382 AUcard . Skinner (1887) L. R. 36 Ch. D. 145 56 L. J. Ch. 1052 57 L. T. 61 36 W. R. 257 34 Allen, i?e [1905] 2 Ch. 400 74 L. J. Ch. 593 9J L. T. 597 ; 54 W. R. 91 21 T. L. R. 662 1099 Aliens. Bewsey (1877) 7 Ch. D. 453; 37 L. T. 688 C. A. 590,598 Allen V. Cameron (1833) i Cr. & M. 832 ; 3 Tyr. 907 ; 2 L. J. Ex. 263 124 Flood [1898] A. C, i .'Ulen V. 67 L. J. Q. B. 119 77 L. T. 717 ; 46 W. R. 258 62 J. P. 595^H. L. (E.) 335,470,479,480,484 Allen . Hill (1590) Cro. Eliz. 238 762 Allen o. Jackson (1875) L. R. i Ch. D. 399 ; 45 L. J. Ch. 310 33 L. T. 713 ; 24 W. R. 306 42
; ; ; ;
. . .
...... .....
. .
.
'
.....
. . .
.504
........
; .
.
.815
...
;
..........
; ; . .
.
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
AUen
Allen Allen Allen
ti.
Iv
L.
612;
V.
V.
.y^
R. 6 Q. B. 65
C. C. 621
40 L.
J.
Q. B. 55
.
23L.T.
.
1 H. L. C. 191 ; 11 Jur. 785 (1858) 11 Moo. P. C. 427 ; 6 W. R. 825. V. Wood (1893) 68 L. T. 143 ; 4 R. ^49 Allgood V. Gibson (1876) 34 L. T. 883 ; 25 W. R. 60 . Allsop, Re [1914] I Ch. i ; 83 L. Ch. 42 ; 109 L. T. 641 ;
McPherson (1847)
Haddock
J.
30 T. L. R. 18
1
146,
;
147
29 L.
745
;
J.
Ex.
~L.
31556
Allwood
V.
Heyivood (1863)
;
H.
&
C.
32
J,
Ex. 153
II
W.
R. 291
[1917] 2 Ch. 441
.
,
574
v.
Manning
33 T. L. R. 205 ; Alsop V. Bowtrell (16 19) Cro. Jac. 541 I2o8 Alton . Midland Ry. Co. (i86!|) J9 C. B. N. S. 213 34 L. J. C. P. 292; Jur. (N. S.) 672 ; 12 L.T. 703 ; 13 W. R. 918 472) 477 Alton Woods Case (1600) i Rep. 40 b 641 Amalgamated Society . Osborne [1910] A. C. 87 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 87 loi 6 L. T. 787; 54L. J. 215; 26T. L. R. 177 H. L. (E.) (i86c) 8 C. B. N. S. 597 Amann 0. 29 L. J. C. P. 313 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 505, 527 47 2 L. T. 322 ; 8 W. R. 47P Ambergate Ry. Co. v. Midland Ry. Co. (1853) 2 El. & HI. 793 ; 2 C. L. R. B. 17 18 Jur. 243 261 ; 23 L. J. Q. 84 Ambler, Re [1905] i Ch. 697 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 367 92 L. T. 716 ; 53 W. R. 584 ; 21 T. L. R. 376 C. A. 1381, 1389 ,ij'' Ambler o. Gordon [1905] i K. B. 417 74 L. J. K. B. 185 ; 92 L. T. 96 ; 53 W. R. 300 ; 21 T. L. R. 205 711 ^. 1182 Ambrose v. Kerrison (1851) 10 C. B. 776 ; 20 L. J. C. P. 135 Amherst . Dawling (1700) 2 Vern. 401 755 Amis V. Witt (1863) 33 Beav. 619 1292 Amott V. Holden ('852) 18 Q. B. 593 ; 22 L. J. Q. B. 14 17 Jur. 318 996 ^Amphlett 0. Parke (1831) 2 Russ. &M. 221 1358 Ancaster (Duke) v. Mayer (1785) i Bro. C. C. 454 819, 987 Anderson's (Lord) Case (1597) 7, Rep. 21 a 863 Anderson, Re [1905] 2 Ch. 70 74 L. J. Ch. 433 92 L. T. 725 53 W. R.
.
-427
Damm
...
;
;
,
.......
. . .
....
;
510 Anderson
8io, 1279
v.
41 L. J. Ch. 247
. ., .
i2;2oW.
Anderson v. Calvert (1908) 24 T. L. R. 399 C. A. 370, 521 Anderson v. CoUinson [1901] 2 K. B. 107 70 L. J. K. B. 320 ; 84 L. T. 465 ; 49 W. R. 623 Anderson o. Gorrie [1895] i Q. B. 668 ; 14 R. 79 ; 71 L. T. 382 Ci A. 342 ./^derson 0. Martindale (l8oi) I East, 497 ; 6 R. R. 334 Anderson v. M. Ry. Co. (1861) 3 E. & E. 614 ; 30 L. J. Q. B. 94 ; 3 L. T. 809 ; 641,645 7jur. (N. S.)4ii Anderson v. Pignet (1872) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 180 ; 42 L. J. Ch. 310 ; 27 L. T. 638,828 740; 21 W. R. 150 Anderson v. Radcliffe (1858) E. B. & E. 806 29 L. J. Q. B. 128 ; 6 Jur. . . 8 W. R. 283Ex. Ch. I L. T. 487 (N. S.) 578 384 Anderson v. Vicary [1900] 2 Q. B. 287 69 L. J. Q. B. 713 ; 83 L. T. 15 ; 48
.
26 L. X1259,1260
.468
.157
'
W. R. 593 ; 16 T. L. R. 421C. A. 7^3 Anderton's and Milner's Contract (1890) 45 Ch. D. 476 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 765 ; 63 L. T. 332 ; 39 W. R. 44 633 Andrew v. Bridgman [1908] i K. B. 596 ; 77 L. J. K. B. 272 ; 98 L. T. 656.. .630, 631
:
Digitized
by Microsoft
lyi
TABLP OF CASES
'
T. L. R. 620 52 W. R. 126 Andrew's Case (1591) Cro. Eliz. 214 Andrewes v. Andrewes [1908] 2 K. B. 567 77 L. J. K. B. 974 99 L. T. 214 24T. L. R. 709 Andrews, Re. (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 153 21 W. R. 480 ; 28 L. T. 353 sub nom. . Edwards, Re, 42 L. J. Q. B. 99 441, Andrews, iSe [1902] 2 Ch. 394 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 676 87 L. T. 20 50 W. R. 569 ; 18 T. L. R. 646 1292, Andrews' Trust, Re [1905] 2 Ch. 48 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 462 ; 92 L. T. 766 21 T. L. R. 512; 53W. R. 585 . : Andrews . Askey (1837) 8 C. & P. 7 Andrews o. ClifFord (1920) Times Newspaper, December 20 Andrews v. HaWley (1857) 26 L. J. Exch. 323 Andrews v. Harris (1841) i Q. B. 3 7 D. P. C. 712 Aridirews 0. Mockford [1896] i Q. B. 372 65 L. J. Q. B. 302 ; 73 L. T. 726 . Andrews p. Nott-Bower [1895] i Q. E. 888 ; 64 L. J. Q. B. 536 ; 72 L. T. 530 ; '. . . 43 W. R. 582 14 R. 404 59 J. P. 420 Andrews v. Partington (1790) 2 Cox Eq. 223 3 Bro. C. C. 60 .
. . ; ; ;
.
.......
; ;
; . . . . ; ; ; . . . .
L. J.
K. B. 865
89 L. T. 450
356
461 1225 1293
1103
... ......
....
. .
. .
.5^7
.
1214
Andrews Andrews
Andrews
v.
v.
Partington (1791) 3 Bro. C. C. 401'. Salt (1873) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 622 28 L. T. 686
. ;
21
W.
0. Wait [1907] 2 Ch. 500 76 L. J. Ch. 6.76 97 L. T. 428 Angerstein o. Martin (1823) Turn. & Russ. 232; 2 L. J. (O. S.) Ch. 88 j 24 R. R. 32 1270 Anglesey (Marquis of), i?i![i903] 2 Ch. 727 72 L. J. Ch. 782 19 T. L. R. 719.. .1057 Anglo-Egyptian N^viga|tion Co. v. Rennie (1875) 44 L. J. C. P. 130 L. R. 10 C. P. 27T . 32 L. T. 467 23 W. R. 626 ., 132,(46 Anglo-Italian Bank v. Dayies (1878) 9 Ch. D. 275 ; 47 L. J. Ch. 833 ; 39 ." L. T. 244; 27W. R. 3 C. A.. ,961 Aiigus o. Dalton (1881) L. R. 6 App. Ca. 740 50 L. J. Q. B. 689 ; 44 L. T. 844 ; 30 W. R. 191 ; 46 J. P. 132H. L. (E.) 327 Angus V. ClifFord [1891] 2 Ch. 449 60 L. J. Ch. 443 65 L. T. 274 ; 39 W. R.
.
498
Angus Angus
31
V. V.
...
.
538, 539
.
335
641 Anichini (1839) 2 Curt. 210 Ankerson v. Connelly [1907] i Ch. 678 76 L. J. Ch. 402 T. L. R. 486 Anon. (n. d.) i Brownl. 43 .
W.R.
247,961,967,968
1194
;
Anichini
96 L. T. 681
.
.
23
.
Anon, Anon. Anon. Anon. Anon. Anon. Anon, Anon. Anoni Anon, Anon. Anon. Anon. Anon.
46 Brownl. 30
1;
[temp.
Edw.
YY. Y. Y. (1489) Y.
(1331) (1336) (1440) (i486)
(1494) (i 502)
(1505)
B. Ass; pi. 9 B. 10 Edw. Ill, Hil.pl. II B. 19 Hen. VI, Mich. pi. 59 B. I Heh. VII, Pasch. pi. 17 B. 5 Hen. VII, Mich. pi. 22 Keilw. 92 . Keilw. 47 a . . . Keilw. 65 Y. B. 26 Hen. VIII, 'Tr. pi. 15
.'
.
712 647
434
763 675
686, 697
'"''.
.
. .
675,676 . 434
718
697, 718
(1537) Dyer, 30 b
......... a.........
. . . . . . .
436 762
645 675 502 703
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Ivii
PAG
Anon. fi537l Dyer, 33 a 650 Anon. (1560) Moo. 19 037 Anon. 11564) Moo. 62 785, 791 Anon. (1576) Dyer, 303 b 655 Anon. (1571) Owen, 35 762,763 Anon. 1572) 4 Leon. 33 641 Anon. 1573) 4 Leon. 35 764 Anon. 1 584) Moore, 1 59 616 Anon. 1588) Oi Owen, 37 715 Anon. fi6ii) I Bulstr., at p. 177 614 Anon. 1618) 12 Rep. loi 699 Anon. 1618) Hobart, 235 677 Anon. 622) 2 Rolle Rep. 255 780 Anon. ('1641) March, i8!i-9 i: 937 Anon. (1674) I Vent. 264 429 Anon. (1704) 6 Mod. 27 324 Anon. (1706) II Mod. 99 500 Anon. (temp. Cowper) quoted in Arnot v. Biscoe (1748) i Ves. Sen. 96 761 Anon. (1751) 2 Ves. Sen. 374 1218 Anon. (1773) Lofft. 275 6.5 Anslow V. Cannock Chase [1909] A. C. 435 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 679 100 L. T. 786; 53 Sol. Jo. 519; 25 T.L.R. 570 463 Anthony, Re [1893] 3 Ch. 498 62 L. J. Ch. 1004 ; 69 L. T. 300 41 W. R. 667 ; 3 R. 671 1396 Anthony v. Haney (1832) 8 Bing. 186 i M. & Scott, 300 i L. J. C. P. 81 82 Anthony v. Haneys (1832) 8 Bing. 186 i M. & S. 306 ; i L. J. C. P. 81 . 386 Antrobus . Davidson (18 17) 3 Mer. 578 ; 17 R. R. 130 . 295 Applebee, Re [1891] 3 Ch. 422 60 L. J. Ch. 793 65 L. T. 406 ; 40 W. R. 90 . . 1276 Appleby, Re [1903] i Ch. 565 ; 51 W. R. 153 C. A. 1079, 1104 Appleby v. Franklin (1885) 17 Q. B. D. 93 ; 55 L. J. Q. B. 129 54 L. T. 135 ; 50 J- P- 359 34 W. R. 231 338, 477 Appleby v. Meyers (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 651 ; 36 L. J. C. P. 331 ; 16 L. T. ~ . 669; reversing itf.W.'R.S^i 130,132,224 Appleton, Re (1885) 29 Ch. D. 893 54 L. J. Ch. 954 ; 52 L. T. 906 49 " 1285 J. P.708. Appleton I). Binks (1804) 5 East, 418 ; i Smith, 361 ; 7 R. R. 672 61 Appleton II. Rowley (1869) L. R. 8 Eq. 139 ; 38 L. J. Ch. 689 ; 2 L. T. 600 1314 Archbold w. Scully (1861) 9 H. L. C. 360 . . . 763,765,843,847 Archer's Case (1597) I Rep. 63 b, 66 b 654,660,801 Arden o. Arden (1885) 29 Ch. D. 702 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 655 ; 52 L. T. 610 ; 33 W. R. 593 1057 Ardern, In the Goods of, [1898] P. 147 67 L. J. P. 70 ; 78 L. T. 536 1337 Ardesoife v. Bennett (1772) 2 Dick. 463 906 Ards 0. Watkins (1597) Cro. Eliz. 637 740 Argos, cargo ex (1873). L. R. 5 P. C. 155 28 L. T. 745 ; 21 W. R. 707 41 Arkwright v. Cell (1839) 5 M. & W. 203 ; 2 H. & H. 17 8 L. J. Ex. 201 . 706 Arkwright v. Newbold (1881) 17 Ch. D. 301 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 372 ; 44 L. T. 393 ; 29 W. R. 455 C. A 541,543 Arlett V. AUis (1827) 7 B. & C. 346 ; 9 D. & R. 897 ; 9 B. & C. 671 ; 5 L. J. R. 214-321 (O. S.) K. B. 391 ; 31 R. 398 . Armorieo. Ddamirie (1722) t Stra. 505 . 411, 417, 424, 921, 936 Armstrong v. Jackson [1917] 2 K. B. 822 ; 86 L. J. K. B. 1375 ; 1 17 L. T. 479 61 Sol. Jo. 631 ; 33 T. L. R. 444 39 Armstrong v. Milbum (1886) 54 L. T. 247, 723 C. A 76
,
........
.........
; ; ; ; ; . ; . . . ; ; .
...
; . .
.......
. . ;
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
Iviii
TABL^ OF CASES
tAGE
b.
Stokes (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 605 ; 41 L. J. Q. B. 253 ; 26 L. T. 872 ; 21 W. R. 52 Armstrong, Whitworth & Co. . Redford [192b] A. C. 757 ; 89 L. J. K. B. . . 495; 64S0I. Jo. 388; 36T. L. R. 451H. L. (E.) Armytage v. Armytage [1898] P. 178 ; 67 L. J. P. D. A. 90 ; 78 L. T. 689 ; 14 T. L. R. 480 Arnold v. Cheque Bank (1876) i C. P. D. 579 ; 45 L. J. C. P. 562 ; 34 L. T. . 729 ; 24 W. R. 759 Arnold v. Poole (Mayor) (1842) 4 Man. & Gr. 860 ; 5 Scott (N. R.) 741 ; 2 . D. (N. S.) 574 ; I? L. J. C. P. 97 ; 7 J"r. 653 . . .A.rnot o. Biscoe (1748) T Ves. Sen. 95 . . . . . .
Armstrong
63
..........
.
.456
1204
416
S3 761 991
>
Arnot V. TyrreU (1855) 21 Beav. 49 Arthington v. Coverly (1733) 2 Eq. Ca. Ab. 518 Arthur Average Association, Re (1876) 34 L. T. 942 ; 45 L. J. Ch. 346 L. R. 3 Ch. D. 522; 24 W. R. 514 Arthur o. Barton (1840) ,6 M. &W. 138; 9 L. J. Ex. 187 . Arthur . Wynne (1880) 49 L. J. Ch. 556 14 Ch. D. 603 ; 43 L. T. 46 ; 28 ./ W. R. 972 Artizans Land and Mortgage Corporation, Re [1904] i Ch. 796 73 L. J. Ch. 12 Mans. 98 581 52 W. R. 330 Arundel (Countess) v. Steere (1605) Cro. Jac. 25
. .
.
......
.
899
54 56
130
...
. ;
Ash
Pouppeville (1867) L. R. 3 Q. B. 86 ; 37 L. J. Q. B. 55 8 B. & S. 825; 16 W. R. 191 151 Ashburner v. Macguire (1786) 2 Bro. C. C. 336 1264 Aahburton (Lord) v. Nocton [191 5] i Ch. 274 84 L. J. (ih. 193 iii L. T. 864 59 Sol. Jo. 145 ; 31 T. L. R. 122 C. A 89s Ashbury Carriage Co. . Riche (1875) L. R. 7 H. L. C. 693 ; 44 L. J. Ex. 185 ; 24W. R. 794 10 33 L. T. 451 Ashby o. Ashby (1827) 7 B. & C. 444 6 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. 41 i Man. & R. 180 31 R. R. 242 1368 Ashby 0. White (1703) 2 Ld. Raymond, 938'; 3 id. 320; i Smith L. C. (loth ed.) 231 ; 14 Howell St. Tr. 695 Salk. 19 ; 6 Mod. 45 ; Holt, 524 327, 529 Ashcroft V. Ashcroft [1902] P. 270 71 L. J. P. 125 87 L. T. 229 ; 51 W. R. 292; i8 T. L. R. 821 C. A. 1200 Asher c. Whitlock (1865) L. R. i Q. B. i 35 L. J. Q. B. 17 ; 11 Jur. (N. S.) 13 L. T. 254 14 W. R. 26 925 389, 390, 557, 765, 767, ^42 Ashforth, Re [1905] i Ch. 535 74 L. J. Ch. 361 ; 92 L. T. 534 ; 5^ W. R. 328 21 T. L. R. 329 662, 1075 Ashley v. Ashlev (1833) 6 Sim. 358 ; 3 L. J. Ch. 61 . 657 .'Vshlin V. Lee (1875) 44 L. 32 L. T. 348 23 W. R. 458 J. Ch. 376 76 Ashmole . Wainwright (1842) 2 G. & D. 217 ; 2 Q. B. 837 11 L. J. Q. B. 79 6 Jur. 729 321 Ashton, Re [1897] 2 Ch. 574 66 L. J. Ch. 731 46 W. R. 77 L. T. 49
V.
....
; ;
987 722
.....
138
1102, 17.82
. .
.
Stock (1877) 6 Ch. D. 719 ; 25 W. R. 862. 766, 767, 772 Ashwell, iie (1859) Johns. 112 . 096 Ashworth v. Lord (1887) 36 Ch. D. 545 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 230 58 L. T. 18 36 R. 446 W. 820 Ashworth v. Stanwix (1861) 3 E. & E. 701 30 L. J. Q. B. 183 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 467;4L.T. 85 4^g Asiatic Banking Coi^., Ex pane (1867) 36 L. L. R. 2 Ch. 391 ; J. Ch. 222 16L. T. 162; 15 W. R. 414 91,103 Aspinall v. Pickford (1800) 3 B. & P. 44 n. (a) 260 AspinaP v. Leigh (1690) 2 Vern. 217 668
Ashton
V.
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Astbury
Astley Astley
V. v.
lix
in
;
67 L.
.w. R.536
v.
J. Ch. 471
78 L. T. 494; 46
1383,1385
321 138
786, 787
Str. 915 2 Barn. K. B. 40 (1801) 2 Bos. & P. 346 ; 5 R. R. 618 Aston V. Aston (1749) i Ves. Sen. 264 . Astrey v. Ballard (1676) Freem. K. B.
Reynolds (1731) 2
Weldon
Atherton, In the Goods oj, 66 L. T. 267 J. P. 134 Athill, Re (1880) 16 Ch. D. 211 50 L. J. Ch. 123 ; 43 L. T. 581 i 29 W. R, 309 Atkin . Acton (1830) 4 C. & P. 208 Atkins V. Perrin (1862) 3 F. & F. 179 Atkins V. Temple (1625) i Rep. in Ch. 14 Atkinson, Re (1886) 31 Ch. D. 577 ; 55 L. 54 L. T. 403 34 W. R, J. Ch. 49
; ;
79
1339
445C. 884 Atkinson, Re [1908] 2 Ch. 307 ; 77 L. J. Ch. 766 99 L. T. 174 C. A. 1371, 1372 Atkinson, i?e (191 1) 80 L. J. Ch. 370 103 L. T. 860 C. A. 1099,1100 Atkinson v. Baker (1791) 4 T. R. 229 2 R. R. 366 579 Atkinson v. Bradford Building Society (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 377 59 L. J. Q. B. 360 62 L. T. 857 38 W. R. 630 C. A 1386 Atkinson o. Denby (i86o) H. & N. 778 31 L. J. Ex. 362 8 Jur. (N. S.) 104 10 W. R. 389 7 L. T. 93 43 Atkinson's & Horsell's Contract [1912] 2 Ch. i ; 81 L. J. Ch. 588 106 L. T. Sol. Jo. 324 C. A. 548 ; 56 842 Atkinson v. Morris [1897] P. 40 66 L. J. P. 17 75 L. T. 440 ; 45 W. R. 293C. A 1252 Atkinson v. Newcastle Waterworks (1877) 2 Ex. D. 441 46 I,. J. Ex. 775 36 L. T. 761 25 W. R. 794 C. A. 328 Atkyns v. Clare (1671) i Ventr. 407 676, 685, 686 Atkyns v. Pearce (1857) 2 C. B. N. S. 763 ; 26 L. J. C. P. 252 3 Jur.
; ;
.... ....
;
(N. S.)ii8o Attack V. Bramwell (1863). 3 B. & S. 520 892 7 L. T. 740 II W. R. 309 Attenborough v. Solomon [1913] A. C. 76
; ;
57
;
532
;
.
107 L. T. 833
.
.
29 T. L. R. 79 ; 57 Sol. Jo. 76 954, 957, 1406, 1407 v. Stephens (1808) i Taunt. 190 382 9 R. R. 731 A.-G. V. Ailesbury (Marquis) (1887) L. R. 12 App. Cas. 672 57 L. J. Q. B. 1360 58 L. T. 192 ; 36 W. R. 737 83 21 T. L. R. .\.-G. V. Antrobus [1905] 2 Ch. 188 69 J. P. 141 ; 92 L. T. 790 746 471 3 L. G. R. 1071 .A.-G. o. Brereton (1751) 2 Ves. Sr. 426 724 2 Ch. 598 L. J. Ch. 743 88 L. T. 858 A.-G. V. British Museum [1903] 72 682, 683, 697 51 W. R. 582 19 T. L. R. 5S5 6 A.-G. V. Brunning (i860) 8 H. L. C. 243 ; 30 L. J. Ex. 379 3 L. T. 36 Jur. (N. S.) 1083 ; 8 W. R. 362 1357, 1370 870 A.-G. II. Burdet (1717) 2 Vern. 755 A.-G. V. Cambridge Consumers Gas Co. (1868) L. R. 4 Ch. App. 81 38 L. J. Ch. 94; 19L. T. 508; 17W. R. 145 374,375 18 Jur. 779 23 L> J. Ch. 662 A.-G. V. Chambers (1859) 4 De G. & J. 206 2 W. R. 636 779 A.-G. 0. Christ's Hospital (1831) 9 L. J. (O. S.) Ch. 186 ; 1 Russ. & M. 626
Attersoll
.
....
;
Tarn. 393 ; 3 Bro. C. C. 165 A.-G. V. Conduit Colliery Co. [1895] i Q. B. 312 ; 64 h. J. Q, B. 207 ; 15 R. 267 ; 71 L. T. 777 i 43 W. R. 366 ; 59 J. P. 70 A.-G. V. Copeland [1901] 2 K. B. loi ; 70 L. J. K. B. 512 : 65 J. P. 581 ; 84 L. T. 562 ; 49 W. R. 489 ; 17 T. L. R. 422
992
402
705
Digitized
by
l\/licrosoft<^
Ix
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
V. c. V.
V.
Downing (Lady)
(1767) Wilmot, 21
/
'
Downshire (Marquis) (18 18) 5 Price, 269 Eardley (1820) 8 Price, 39. Emerson [1891] A. C. 649 ; 61 L. J. Q. B. 79
709
Hos,f)ital (1853) 17
65 L. T. 564
;
55
J. P.
K.
Ewelme
Beav. 366
22 L. J. Ch. 846
W.
R.
18,690,724 523 A.-G. V. Forbes (1836) 2 Myl. & Cr. 123 374 A.-G. V. Forster (1804) 10 Ves. 335 755 10 A.-G. V. G. E. Ry. Co. (1880) 5 App. Ca. 473 A.-G. V. Gj N. Ry. Co. [1909] i Ch. 775 ; 78 L. J. Cli. 577 73 J. P. 41 C. A.. 851 A.-G. o. Horner (1884) 14 Q. B. D. 245 ; 54 L. J. Q. B. 227 49 J. P. 326 33 W. R. 93C. A.-G. V. Horner [1912] W. N. 199 28 T. L. R. 522 ; 10 107 L. T. 547 .' L. G. R. 812. 851 A.-G. V. Hubbuck (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 275 ; 53 L. J. Q. B. 146 ; 50 L. T. . 374C. A. 1355 A.-G. V. Jacobs-Smith [1895] 2 Q. B. 341 ; 64 L. J. Q. B. 605 ; 14 R. 531 ; 72 L. T. 714 ; 43 W. R. 657 59 J. P. 468 C. A. A.-G. V. Jeffreys [1908] A. C. 411 ; 77 L. J. Ch. 685 24 52 Sol. Jo. 660 T. L. R. 793 1328 A.-G. . Kerr (1840) 2 Beav. 420 ; 9 L. J. Ch. 190; 4 Jur. 406 . 553 A.-G. V. Lewin (1837) ^ Sim. 366 ; C. P. Cooper, 51 i Jur. 6 L. J. Ch. 204
; ;
.684
.104
.
'
10, 590 134 A.-G. V. Manchester Corporation [1893] 2 Ch. 87, 91 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 459 ; 3 R. . 427 : 68 L. T. 608 41 W. R. 459 57 J. P. 343 374, 401 A.-G. V. Mathieson [1907] 2 Ch. 383 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 682 23 97 L. T. 450 T. L. R. 7S4 C. 1099 A.-G. 0. Maxwell (18 14) 8 Price, 76 n 848 A.-G. V. Murray [1904] i K. B. 165 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 66 ; 89 L. T. 710 52 W. R. 258 ; 68 J.. P. 8g 20 T. L. R. 137 304 A.-G. V. New York Breweries Co. [1898] i Q. B. 205 67 L. J. Q. B. 86 L. T. 61 62 J. P. 132 ; 46 W. R. 193 ; 14 T. L. R. 119 C. A. 78 68 L. J. Q. B. 135 ; 79 L. T. 568 affirmed [1899] A. C. 62 63 J. P. 179 48 W. R. 32 ; 15 T. L. R. 93 1343 A.-G. V. Nottingham Corp. [1904] i Ch. 673 ; 68 J. P. 125 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 512 ; 52 W. R. 281 90 L. T. 308 20 T. L. R. 257 374, 401 A.-G. B. Pamther (1792) 3 Bro. C. C. 441 1257 A.-G. 0. Parsons (1832) 2 Cr. & J. 279 2 Tyr. 223 i L. 703 J. Ex. 103 A.-G. 0. Reynolds [1911] 2 K. B. 888 80 L. J. K. B. 1073 ; 104 L. T. 852 721 A.-G. V. Richmond (Duke of) (No. 2) [1907] 2 K. B. 940 76 L. J. K. B. 1049 22 T. L. R. 742 564 A.-G. V. Sandover [1904] i K. B. '689 73 L. J. K. B. 478 ; 90 L. T. 480 ; 52 W. R. 573 ; 20 T. L. R. 351 595 A.-G. V. Sheffield Gas Consumers Co. (1853) 3 De G. M. & G. 320 22 L. J. Ch. 811; 17 Jur. ,677; I W.R. 185. 374,375 A.-G. V. Thames Conservators (1862) i H. & M. i i N. R. 121 8 Jur. (N. S.) 1203 ; 8 L. T. 9 ; II W. R. 163 773 A.-G. 0. Tod-Heatley [1897] i Ch. 560 66 L. J. Ch. 275 76 L. T. 174 ; 45
; ;
..
'
.... ......
;
.
.....
; ; ; ;
W. R. 394 C.
o.
401
5
;
A.-G.
A.-G. A.-G. A.-G.
W.
V.
V.
II.
Ch. D. 750 ; 46 L. J. Ch. 654 ; 36 L. T. 684 R. 802 ; (1880) 15 Ch. D. 150 ; 43 L. T. 486 C. A. . . Tomline (1886) 14 Ch. D. 58 ; 43 W. R. 486^C. A. . . Vigor (1803) 8 Ves. 256
'.
Tomline (1877)
25
. .
Wemyss
(i888)lL. R. 13
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
A.-G.
V.
Ixi
W.
85C. A &
46
679 539 59S
AuBten V. Bennet (1693) i S^. 356 551 Austerberry v. Oldham Corporation (1885) 29 Ch. D. 7^0 ; 55 L. J. Ch. 633 ; . . 803, 804 53 L. T. 543 49 J. P. 532 ; 33 W. R. 807-C. A. Austin, Re (1865) 34 L. J. Ch. 499 ; 12 L. T. 440 ir Jur. (N. S.) 536 13 W. R. 761 1228
. i ; ;
Chambers (1838) 6 CI. & F. 1 233 Dowling (1870) L. R. 5 C. P. 534 ; 39 L. J. C. P. 260 ; 22 L. T. 721 18 W. R. 1003 440, 488 Austin V. Mills (1S53) 9 Exch. 28S ; 2 C. L. R. 411 ; 23 L. J. Ex. 40 18 Jur,
Austin Austin
V.
V.
;
16; 2 W. R. 107 Austin V. Newham [1906] 2 K. B. 167 75 L. J. K. B. 563 ; 95 L. T. 490 Australian Auxiliary Co. v. Mounsey (1858) 4 K. & J. 733; 27 L. J. Ch, 729 ; 4 Jur. (N. S.) 1224 ; 6 W. R. 734 Australian Newspaper Co. v. Bennett [1894] A. C. 284 (P. C.) ; 6 R. 484 63 L. J. P. C. 105 70 L. T. 597 ; 58 J. P. 604 Aveling o. Knipe (1815) 19 Ves. 441 5 13 R. R. 240 Averill, Re [1898] i Ch. 523 ; 67 L. J. Ch. 233 ; 78 L. T. 320 ; 46 W. R. 460
; ;
323 573
1008
....
508 1091
7SI.
"35
Avery v. (1855) 26 L. J. Q. B. 3 ; 6 El. & Bl. 953 ; 3 Jur. (N. S. 238 ; S W. R. 45 Axford (Charles), Re (i860) i Sw. & Tr. 540 ; 2 L. T. 86 ; 8 W. R. 340. Ayerst v. Jenkins (1873) L. R. j6 Eq. 275 42 L. J. Ch. 690 ; 29 L. T. 126 21 W. R. 878 Aylesford (E.) v. Morris (1873) 8 Ch. App. 484 Aylesford Peerage Case (1885) 11 App. Cas. i Ayre v. Craven (1834) 2 A. & E. 2 ; 4 Nev. & M. 220 ; 4 L. J. K. B. 35. Ayres v. Falkland (1697) Ld. Raym. 326 Ayrey v. Hill (1824) 2 Add. 206
Bowden
147 1258
"OS
36 1207
52s 560 J2S7
. B. V. M. (1852) 2 Rob. Ecc. 580 Bacon's Will, Re (l886) 31 Ch. D. 460 55 L. J. Ch. 368 ; S4L. T. ijo; 34 W. R. 319 Bacon o. Jones (1839) 4 My. & Cr. 436 ; 3 Jur. 994 Bacon v. Smith (1841) i Q. B. 345 Bacon v. Waller (1616) 3 Bulstr. 204 Baddeley v. E. Granville (1887) 19 Q. B. D. 423 56 L. J. Q, B.501; 57L.T, 268 ; 36 W. R. 63 ; 51 J. P. 822 Badeley v. Consolidated Bank (1886) 34 Ch. D. 536 ; 55 L. T. 63 j ; 3SW.
; . . ; .
...
....
1(77
1328
446 294
136
Badenach,
27s
;
/a
the
Aid. 153 Badham, Re (1893) 10 Morr. 252 ; 69 L. T. 356 ; 5 R. 521 Badische Anilin Fabrik v. Isler [1906] i Ch. 605 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 411; 94L. T. 367 ; 22 T. L. R. 326 ; 23 R. P. C. 173 Badkin v. Powell (1776) 2 Cowp. 476 L. T. 769 ; 8 Com, Bagel V. Miller [1903] 2 K. B. 212 72 L, J. K. B. 495 ;
Badger
Ford (1819)
&
....
& Tr.
.
465
33 L.
P. 179; II L. T,
Cas. 218
Bagnall v. Levinstein {1907] i K. B. 531 ; 76 L. J. K. B. 234 ; 96 L. T. 184 23 T. L. R. 165 Bagot, Re [1893] 3 Ch. 348 62 L. J. Ch. 1006 ; 69 L. T. 399C. A,
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
I
.
Ch,
1.77
.
63 L. J. Ch. 515
. ;
70 L. T. 229
8 R. 41
42
754 Bagot (1863) 32 Beav. 509 33 L. J. Ch. 116:9 J-ur. (N. S.) 1022 9L. T. 217; 12W. R. 35 787,790 Bagot Pneum. Tyre, Co. v. Clipper Pneum. Tyre Co. [1902] i Ch. 146 71 18 L. J. Ch. 158; 85 L. T. 652; 50 W. R. 177 Bagshaw v. Buxton Board of Health (1875) i Ch. D. 224 45 L. J. Ch. 260 400 34 L. T. 112 ; 24 W. R. 231
Bagot
V.
Baghaw
0. o.
Spencer (1748)
B.agshawe
(1604) Cro. Jac. 147 Bailey, In the Goods of (1861) 2 Sw. & Tr. 156 (N. S.) 712 ; 4 L. T. 477
Goward
...... ......
; ;
560 699
1256 863
31 L. J. P. 178
7 Jur.
.
Bailey's Trusts,
Bailey
v.
(1869) 38 L. J. Ch. 237 ; 20 L. T. 168 ; 17 W. R. 393 Barnes [1894] i Ch. 25 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 73 ; 69 L. T. 542 ; 7 R. 9
Re
W. R. 66C. A. 757 Bailey v. Stephens (1862) 12 C. B. N. S. 91 ; 31 L. J. C. P. 226 ; 8 Jur. (N. S.) 6 L. T. 356 .10 W. R. 868 1063 677, 679 Bailey v. Sweeting (1861) 9 C. B. N. S. 843 ; 30 L. J. C. P. 150 ; 9; W. R. . loi, 102 273 Baillie v., Kell (1838) 4 Bing. N. C. 638 6 Sc. 379 7 L. J. C. P. 249 Baily's Case (1868) 37 L. J. Ch. 670 ; L. R. ^ Ch. 592 ; 19 L. T. 58 16 .' 88 W. R. 1093 Baily v. de Crespigpy (1869) 38 L. J. Q. B. 98 ; L. R. 4 Q. B. 180 ; 19 L. T. 120 681 j 17 W. ,R. 494 Bain . Cooper (1842) 9,M. &.W. 701 ; i D. (N. S.) 11 iiL. J. Ex. 325 158 Bain v. FothergiU (1874) 43 L. J. Ex. 243 ; L. R. 7 H. L. 158 ; 31 L. f. 387 121 23 W. R. 261 Bain V. Sadler (1871) L. R. 12 Eq. 570 40 L. J. Ch. 791 ; 25 L. T. 202 1374 19 W. R. 1077 Bainbridge o. Postmaster-General [1906] i K. B. 178 ; 75 L. J. K. B. 366 54 W. R. 221 ; 94 L. T. 120 ; 22 T. L. R. 70-C. A 340 Bainbrigge v. Brown (i88j) L. R. 18 Ch. D. 188 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 522 ; 44 L. T. 705; 29 W. R. 782 , 34 Baines o, Blackbourne (1755) Shyers, 216 V 990 Baird's Case (1870) L. R. 5 Gbj. App. 725 ; 23 L. T. 424 18 W. R. 1094 1367 Baird V. Wells (1890) 44 Ch. D. 661 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 673 63 L. T. 312 ; 39 W. R. 61 127, 374 Baird V. Williamson, (1863) 15 C. B. N. S. 376 33 L. J. C. P. loi ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 152; 9L. T. 412; 12 W. R. 150 783 Baker, Re (1890) 44 Ch. D. 262 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 661 62 L. T. 817 ; 38 W. R.
42
. ; ; ; . . .
. .
...
.214
..........
;
...
.
; ;
"
1374,1380,1387 Baker . Bolton (1808) I Campb.' 493 473,477 Baker o.Carrick [1894] i Q. B. 838 9 R. 283 63 L. J. Q. B. 399 70 L. T. 366 ; 42 W. R. 338 ; 58 J, P. 669 518,523 Baker i'. Newton (1839) 2 Beav, 112 ; 8 L. J. Ch. 306 3 Jur. 649 44 Baker p. Parson (1872) 42 L. J. Ch. 228 659 Baker . Sebright (1879) 13 Ch. D. 179 49 L. J. Ch. 65 51 L. T. 614 ; 28 W. R. 177 786, 792 Baker v. Snell [1908] 2 K. B. 825 77 L. J. K. B. 1090 99 L. T. 753 26 Cox C. C. 716 ; 24 T. L. R, 811 C. A 361, 457 Baker 0. White (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 166 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 651 33 L. T. 347 ; 23 W. R. 670 jgg^ 66^ Bakin v. Hughes (1886) 31 Ch. D. 390 55 L. J. Ch. 472 ; 54 L. T. 188 34
; ; ; ;
. .
417-C.A.
......
; ; ;
"
W.
Baldwin
W.
Bl.
1037
-V
'.
1139 505
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Baldwino. London, Chatham
Balfe
Ball, Ball,
V.
Ixiii
PAGE
West
338 <iie Goois 0/ [1902] W. N. 226 1327 Cullimore (1835) 2 C. M. & R. 120 i Gale, 96 619, 643 5 Tyr. 753 ; Ballard v. Bond (1837) i Jur. 7 435 Ballard . Byson (1808) i Taunt. 279 707, Ballard v. Marsden (1880) 14 Ch. D. 374 42 L. T. 763 49 L. J. Ch. 614 28 W. R. 914 1276 Ballard v. Tomlinson (1885) 29 Ch. D. 115 26 Ch. D. 194 403 Balls, Re [1909] i Ch. 791 ; 78 L. 100 L. T. 780 1386, 1398 J. Ch. 341 Balme v. Hiitton (1833) 9 Bing. 478 3 Moo. & Sc. i i Car. i M. 262 2 . Tyr. 620; 2L. J. Ex. 116 531 Bahne v. Hulton (1833) 9 Bing. 471 2 Y. & J. loi 3 M. & Scott, i i Car. & M. 262; 2 Tyr. 620; 2 L. J. Ex. 116 417 Bamfleld v. Popham (1702) i P. Wms. 54 666
Ex
/
250 228
Ball
V.
.......
; . ; ; ;
..
. .
; .
Bamford o. Bamford (1845) 5 Ha. 203 Bamford v. Hayley (see Roe d.). Bamfordo. Turnley (1862) 3 B. & S. 62,
377
;
31 L. J. Q. B. 286 83 9 Jur. (N. S.) 803 394, 395 Banbury Peerage Case (1811) I S. & S. 153 1207 Bandy v. Cartwright (1853) 8 Exch. 913 22 L. J. Ex. 285 635 Banister v. Thompson [1908] P. 362 24 T. L. R. 841 1173 Baukart v. Bowers (1866) L. R. i C. P. 484 106 Banker's Case, The (1695) Skinner, 601 gii Bankes v. Small (1887) 36 Ch. 13. 716 ; 56 L. J. Ch. 832 57 L. T. 292 35 W. R. 765 Bank of Australasia v, Breillast (1847) 6 Moo. P. C. 201 12 Jur. 189 43 Bank of Brazil, Ex pane [1893] 2 Ch. 438 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 578 69 L. T. 14 3R. 518; 41W. R. 521. 123 Bank of Ireland v. McManamy [1916] 2 K. B. (Ir.) i6i 38
; ;
10
W. R.
1320
.571
.
Bank
Banks
of
o.
New
108 38 W. R. 465P. C ; Crossland (1874) L. R. 10 Q. B. 97; 44 L. J. M. C. 8 ; 32 L. T. 208 226 ; 23 W. R. 414 Banks 0. Goodfellow (1870) L. R. 5 Q. B. 549 39 L. J. Q. B. 237 22 L. T. 813. ..1257 Bannatyne v. Maclver [(906] i K. B. 103 75 L. J. K. B. 12c 54 W. R. 317 293; 94 L. T. 150 C. A 116 Banner w. Lowe (1806) 13 Ves. 135. Barber, Re (1881) 18 Ch. D. 624 579, 581 Barber o. Dennis (1703) 6 Mod. 69 Salk. 68 474 Barbers). Lesiter (1859) 7 C. B. N. S. 175 29 L. J. C. P. 161 6 Jur. (N. S.) 654. .481 Barber v. Meyerstein (see Meyerstein v. Barber). Barber v. Penley [1893] 2 Ch. 447 62 L. J. Ch. 623 3 R. 489 ; 68 L. T. 662 402 1014 Barday's Case (1859) 26 Beav. 177 Barclay, Re [1899] i Ch. 674 68 L. J. Ch. 383 ; 80 L. T. 702 119, 1122 Barclay o. Messenger (i 874) 43 L. J. Ch. 449 30 L. T. 350 22 W. R. 522 . 113 Barclay v. Pearson [1893] 2 Ch. 154 3 R. 388 ; 68 L. T. 709 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 321 636 ; 42 W. R. 74 Barclay v. Raine (1823) i Sim. & S. 449 24 R. R. 206 804 Barden's and Withington's Case (1587) 2 Leon. 54 646
P. C. 82
; ; ;
v.
58 L. J.
.......
; ; ;
; .
.....
. ;
Barfoot
953 Barham . Hayman (1559) Dyer, 173a Baring . Abingdon [1892] 2 Ch. 374; 62 L. . . . . W, R. 22
.
v.
Reynolds (1729)
Sir.
434 642
J. Ch. 105
.
67 L. T. 6
41
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixiv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
v.
Nash (1813) i V. & B. 551 Barker, 7<4Gooii 0/(1837) I Curt. 592 Barker, Re (1881) 17 Ch. D. 241 Jo L. J. Ch. 334
Baring
;
1083, loSj
'338
;
44 L. T. 33
29
W. R.
1360 873 Barker v. Brown (1856) i C. B. N. S. 121, 150 ; 26 L. J. C. P. 41 ; 3 Jur. N. S. 18 i 5 W. R. 79 ig, 39 Barker v. Furlong [1891] 2 Ch. 179 181 ; 64 L. T. 411 ; 39 W. R. 621 ; 60 L. J. Ch. 386 410, 415 Barker v. Hodgson (1814) 3 M. & S. 267 ; 15 R. R. 485 . Barker v. Keat (1677) Mod. 249 608, 609 Barker v. Richardson (1821) 4 B. & Aid. $79 ; 23 R. R. 400 . . 851 Barker v. St. Quintin (1844) 12 M. & W. 441 ; i D. & L. 542 ; 13 L. J. Ex.
,
.......
.
.129
144
150
Barkworth
5
Young
156
(1856) 4 Drew,
26 L. J. Ch. 153
W. R.
v.
Haggis (1863) 14 C. B. N. S. 45 ; 32 L. J. C. P. 189 ; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 1325 ; 8 L. T. 320 25 Barnard v. Pumfrett (1841) 5 My. & Cr. 63 ; 10 L. J. Ch. 124 . 1418, 1419 Bamardo v. McHugh [1891] A. C. 388 '65 L. T. 423 ; 55 J. P. 628 ; 40 W. R. 97 1216 Barnes v. Glenton [1899] i Q. B. 885 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 502 ; 80 L. T. 606 ; 47 W. R.435 73 Barnes v. London &c. Insurance Co. [1892] i Q. B. 864 308 Barnes v. Hucile, Ltd. (1907) 96 L. T. 680 ; 23 T. L. R. 389 . 359, 453 Barnes v. Rowley (1797) 3 Ves. 305 995 Barnes v. Ward (1850) 9 C. B. 392 ; 2 Car. & K. 661 ; 19 L. J. C. P. 195
. ;
Barnard
.......
. . ;
....
14 Jur. 334 403 Bamett's Trusts, Re [1902] i Ch. 847 71 L. J. Ch. 408 ; 86 L. T. 346 ; 50 W. R. 681 ; 18 T. L. R. 454 1306 Barnett v. Earl of Guildford (1855) 11 Exch. 19 ; 24 L. J. Ex. 281 ; i Jur. (N. S.) 1142; 3W. R. 406 . 384,612 Barnett v. Sheffield (1852) i De G. M. & G. 371 ; 21 L. J. Ch. 692 16 Jur, 942 "43 Barnett v. Weston (1806) 12 Ves. 130 ; 8 R.~R. 319 761 Barney, Re [1892] 2 Ch. 265 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 585 ; 67 L. T. 23 ; 40 W. R. 637 1107 Barney, Re [1894] 3 Ch. 562 63 L. J. Ch. 676 ; 71 L. T. 180 43 W. R. 105 8R-459 1 120 Batnfather 0. Jordan (1780) 2 Burr. 452 632 Barrack v. McCulloch (1856) 3 K. & J. no; 26 L. J. Ch. loj ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 180 ; 5 W. R. 38 I184 Barratt v. Keams [1905] i K. B. 504 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 318 ; 92 L. T. 2S5 ; 53 W. R. 356 ; 21 T. L. R. 212 512 Barrell,^arte(i875)L. R. loCh. 512; 33L.T.115; 23W.R. S46 136 Barret v. Beckford (1750) i Ves. Sen. 519 I281 Barret 0. Glubb (1776) 2 W. BL 1052 755 Barrett, Re (1889) 43 Ch. D. 70 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 218 ; 38 W. R. 59 1379 Barrett o. Barrett (1627) Hetley, 34 . 787 Barretto v. Young [1900] 2 Ch. 339 ; 69 L. 1241 J. Ch. 605 ; 83 L. T, 154 Barrington v. Turner (1681) 3 Lev. 28 361 Barron 0. Willis [1899] 2 Ch. 578 ; 69 L. J. Ch. J32 ; 82 L. T. 729 48 W. R, ; [igoo] 2 Ch. 121 C. A. 579 ; 34,36 Barrow . Barrow (1858) 4 K. & J. 409 go6 Barrow c. Isaacs [1891] i Q. B. 417 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 179 ; 64 L. T. 686 ; 55 J. P. 517 ; 39 W. R. 338 627 Barro-frs. Lewellin (i6i6)Hob. 62 502
;
....
'.
....
...
.... ....
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
. . '
Ixv
PAGE
.
.
Barrow-in-Furness Corporation and Rawlmson's Contract, Re [1903] i Ch 339 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 233 ; 87 L. T. 724 ; 51 W. R. 248 1410 Barry v. Arnaud (1839) 10 A. & E. 646 2 Per. & DaV. 633 9 L. 1:20 ; J. Q. B. 226 Barry v. Butlin (1838) 2 Moo. P. C. 480 ilZ Barry v. Croskey (1861) 2 J. & H. i 539 540 Barry o. Longmore (1840) 12 A. & E. 639; 4P. & D. 344 965 Barsht v. Tagg [1900J i Ch. 231 69 L. 48 W. R. J. Ch. 91 ; 81 L. T. 777 "o ,g Bartlett v. Downes (1825) 3 B. & C. 616 5 D. & R. 326 ; i C. & P. 522 ; 3 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 90 27 R. R. 436 585, 742 Bartlett v. Holmes (1853) 13 C. B. 630 ; i C. L. R. 159 22 L. J. C. P. 182 I W. R. 334 17 Jur. 858 ,24 Barton o. Cooke (1800) 5 Ves. 461 1266 Barton v. Robins (1769) 1 Phill. 455 n 1258 Bartonshill Coal Co. v. Reid (1856) 3 Macq. H. L. C. 266 4 Jur. (N. S.) 767 ; 6 W. R. 664 448 Barwick's Case (1597) j Rep. 93 a, 94 b 610, 614, 656 Barwick . English Joint Stock Bank (1867) L. R. 2 Exch. 259 ; 36 L. J. Ex. 147; 16L. T. 461; 15W. R. 877 55,346 Baseb^ v. Matthews (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 684 36 L. J. M. C. 93 ; i6 L. T. 417 15W. R. 839 490 Baseley v. Clarkson (1680) 3 Lev. 37 329, 380, 387 Baskerville, Re [1910] 2 Ch. 329 79 L. J. Ch. 687 ; 103 L. T. 90 ; 26 T. L. R. 584 790 Bass V. Bass [1915] P. 17 84 L. J. P. 53 112 L. T. 70 ; 31 T. L. R. 49 C. A. 1200 Bass V. Hendon U. D. C. (1912) 28 T. L. R. 317 C. A. reversing 76 J. P.
;
.
'
f'3 449 Basset v. Maynard (i6oi) Cro. Eliz. 819 722 Bastard v. Smith (1837) ^ Moo. & R. 129 858 Bat^rd 0. Hawes (1853) 2 El. & Bl. 287 3 Car. & K. 277 ; 22 L. J. Q. B. 443; 17 Jur. 1154; I W.R. 387 156,297 Batchelor v. Fortescue (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 474 ; 49 L. T. 644 C. A. 332 Batchelor e. Middleton (1847) 6 Ha. 75 828 Bateman v. Hotchkin (1847) ' Beav. 426 ; 16 L. J. Ch. 514 11 Jun 809 1082 Bateman v. Hunt [1904] 2 K. B. 530 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 782 j 91 L. T. 331 ; 52 W. R. 609 20 T. L. R. 628C. A 1047 Baten's Case (1610) 9 Co. Rep. 53 b, 55 a 391, 398, 404 Bater V. Bater [1906] P. 209 75 L. J. P. 60 94 L. T. 835 ; 22 T. L. R. 408 C. A. 1204 Bates, Re [1907] i Ch. 22 76 L. J. Ch. 29 95 L. T. 753 ; 23 T. L. R. 15 II2I, II22 Bath's (Bishop of) Case (1605) 6 Rep. 34 a, 35 b 608, 614, 641 Batson v. Donovan (1820) 4 B. & Aid. 21 ; 22 R. R. 599 196, 249, 250 Batten v. Kennedy [1907] i Ch. 256 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 162 . 781 Reed (1856) 18 C. B. 696, 714 ; 25 L. J. C. P. 290 ; 4 W. R. 603 BattishiU v. 391 Baudains o. Richardson [1906] A. C. i6g ; 75 L. J. P. C. 57 ; 94 L. ,T. 290 ; 22 T. L. R. 333 1258 Bawden, Re [1894] i Ch. 693 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 412 70 L. T. 526 42 W. R. 1392, 1398 235 ; 8 R. 76 Baxter, Re (191 1) 104 L. T. 710 27 T. L. R. 425 C. A. 992 218 Baxter v. Burfield (1747) 2 Stra. 1266 ; 1 Bott's P. L. pi. 696 Bing. (N. C.) 288 ; 7 Scott, 233 ; i Arn. 519 8 Baxter . Hosier (1839) 5 1084 L. J. C. P. 169 1288 Baxters. Losh (1851) i4Beav. 612; 21 L. J. Ch. 55
;
.......
;
.
'..........
; ; ; ;
. .
...
. . .
....
e
'
C.L.
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixvi
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
ii.
; ;
Baxter
Nurse (1844) 6 M. & G. 935 7 Scott (N. R.) 801 i Car. & K. 10 13 L. J. C. P. 82; 8 Jur. 273 Baxter v. Taylor (1832) 4 B. & Ad. 72 i N. & M. 14 ; 2 L. J. K. B. 65
;
211
.
382,
o.
v.
ii.
Homan
....995
.
396, 405
763
Hodges,
5 Scott, 94 151 Manchester Ry. Co. (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 148 ; 42 L. J. C. P. 78 28 L. T. 366 58, 350 Bayley v. Wilkins (1849) 7 C. B. 886 . 229 Baylis V. Tyssen-Amherst (1877) 6 Ch. D. 500 ; 46 L. J. Ch. 718 ; 37 L. T. 7'7 493 Baynes . Brewster (1841) 2 Q. B. 375 i G. & D. 669 11 L. J. M. C. 5 ; 6 Jur. 392 437 Baynes . Lloyd [1895] i Q. B. 820 635 Bayntun v. Cattle (1833) i M. & Rob. 265 234 Bays V. Bird (1726) 2 P. Wms. 397 684, 685, 687 Bazeley B. Forder (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 559 57 Beach' . Hancock (1853) 27 New Hamp. 223 432 Beadon .Capital Ssmdicate (1912) 56 Sol. Jo. 536 ; 28 T. L. R. 427 C. A. 336 Beak's Estate, Re (1872) L. R. 13 Eq. 489 41 L. J. Ch. 470 26 L. T. 281 1293 Beal V. South Devon Ry. Co. (1864) 3 H. &'C. 339 ; 11 L. T. 184 ; 12 W. R. iiij . . . . . . . 204, 230 B.ealey o. Shaw (1805) 6 East, 208 710 Beamish v. Beamish (1861) 9 H. L. C. 274 11 Ir. C. L. R. 514 5 h. T. 97 8 Jur. (N. S.) 770 1157 Bean v. Bloom (1773) 2 W. BI. 926 715 Beard, Re [1908] i Ch. 383 ; 77 L. J. Ch. 265 ; 98 L. T. 315 24 T. L. R. 225 577 Beard v. Westcott (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 801 ; 5 Taunt. 394 1073 Beardraan v. Wilson (1868) L. R. 4 C. P. 57 38 L. J. C. P. 91 ; 19 L. T. 282 17 W. R. 54 Bearpark 11. Hutchinson (1830) 7 Bing. 178 4 Moo. & P. 848 9 L. J. (0. S.) C. P. I '. 672 Beattie v. Lord Ebury (1872) L, R. 7 Ch. App. 777 ; 41 L. J. Ch. 804 ; 27 L. T. . 20 W. R. 994 ; 398 538 Beauchamp o. Pouley (1831.) r Moo. & Rob. 38 259 Beauchamp (Earl) v. Winn (1873) L. R. 6 H. L. C. 223 ; 30 L. J. Ch. 556 21 L..T. 253; 22W. R. 193 37,703 Beauclerk o.: Be^uclerk [1895] P. 220 ; 64 L. J. P. 102 j 43 W. R. 655 11 R-654 1188 Beaufort . Benty (172 1) I P. Wms. 703 1235 Beaufort (Duke) v. Patrick (1853) 17 Beav. 60 22 L. J. Ch. 489 7 Tur. 682 ; I W. R. 280 . 840 Beaumont, Re [1893] 3 Ch. 490 Beaumont, R^ [1902] i Ch. 889 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 478 86 L. T. 410 ; 50 W.' r". 389 983, 1291, 1292, 1293 Beaumont v. Qreathead (1846) 3 D. & L. 631 ; 2 C. B. 494 ; 15 L. C. P.
184;
v.
....
;
.
.632
...... ........
;
. .
-i
'
J.
130
"154
Beaumontj/. Reeve(i846) 3Q. B. 483; isL. J. Q. B. 141 ; 18 Jur. 284 43 Beavan,i?e[i9i3]2Ch. 595; 109L.T. 538; sSSoLJo. 31. 1380,1381 Bechervaise v. Lewis (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 372 ; 41 L. C, P. 161 ; 26 L. T. J. 848 ; 20 W. R. 726 295)^96 Bechuanaland Co. v. London Trading Bank [1898] 2 Q. B. 658 67 L. J. Q. B. 986 79 L. T. 270 14 T. L. R. 587 ; 3 Com. Cas. 285 1012
. . . ; ; ;
. .'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Beck
Pierce (1889) 23 Q. B. D. 321 ; 58 L. J. Q. B. 516 ; 61 L. T. 448 W. R. 29 ; 54 J. P. 198C. Beckett v. Addyman (1882) 9 Q. B. D. 783 ; 51 L. J. Q. B. 597 . Beckett 11. Buckley (1874) L. R. 17 Eq. 435 ; 22 W. R. 294 . . Beckett v. Leeds Corporation (1871) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 421 ; 26 L. T. 375
V.
Ixvii
PAGE
; '
38
58,
.
356 300
.828
;
20
W. R. 454 Beckett o. Midland Ry. Co. (1867) L. R. i C. P. 241 ; 35 L. J. C. P. 163 I Har. & Ruth. 189 12 Jur. (N. S.) 231 ; 13 L. T. 672 14 W. R.
;
;
778
(1749) i Ves. Sen. 300 1272 (1847) 2 H. L. C. 579 ; 11 M. & W. 315 ;, 12 L. J. Ex. 486 ; 366 13 Jur. 921 ; 7 Jur. 204 Beckwith o. Filby (1827) 6 B. & C. 635 442 Bective (Countess) 1). Hodgson (1864) 10 H. L. C. 656 ; 10 L. T. 202 ; 10 Jur. (N- S.) 375 ; I2-W. R. 625 1271, 1358 Beddall v. Maitland (1881) 17 Ch. D. 174 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 401 ; 44 L. T. 248 ; 29
v.
393 BeckfOrd
Tobm
773
Beckham v. Drake
.........
..... ...... ..... ...... ...... ......
; . .
.
R. 484 383 Constable (1669) Vaugh. 177 901, 1217, 1336 Bede Steamship Co. 0. Wear Commrs. [1907] i K. B. 310 76 L. J. K. B. 332 434 96 L. T. 370 10 Asp. M. C. 379 C. A. Bedell . Constable (1669) Vaugh. 177 1235 Bedford (Duke) v. Alcock (1749) i Wils. 248 687 Bedford v. Backhouse (1730) 2 Eq. Ca. Ab. 615 817 Bedford (Duke) v. British Museum (1882) 2 My. & K. 552; 2 L. J. Ch, 806 129 Bedford v. Johnson (1659) 2 Sid. 153 641, 642 Bedinfield n. Canterbury (Archbishop) (1570) 3 Dyer, 292 b 730 Bedingfield i>. Onslow (1685) Lev. 209 . 667 Bedminster Manor Case (1571) 3 Dyer, 300 a 727 Bedson's Trusts, Re (1884) 25 Ch. D. 458 577 Beech, Re [1920] i Ch. 40 89 L. J. Ch. 9 ; 122 L. T. 117; 63 Sol. Jo. 801 1 121 0/" (1851) 2 Rob. Eccl. Beer, / Ae Gooij 1335 349 Beeston v. CoUyer (1827) 4 Bing. 309 ; 2 Car. & P. 607 ; 12 Moore, 552 2ir 29 R. R. 576 5 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. i8o 2 Jur. (N. S.) Beeston v. Weate (1856) 5 E. & B. 986 25 L. J. Q. B. 115 710 546 4 W. R. 325 Behn 0. Bumess (1863) 3 B. & S. 751 32 L. J. Q. B. 204; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 620; 8 L. T. 207; II W. R. 496 Behn v. Kemble (1859) 7 C. B. N. s. 260 536 21 Behrens o. Richards [1905] 2 Ch. 614 74 L. J. Ch. 615 ; 69 J. P. 381 T. L. R. 705 377 Belding v. Read (1865) 3 H. & C. 955 34 L. J. Ex. 212 13 L. T. 66 11 Jur. (N. S.)547; 13 W. R. 867 1051 Belham, Re [1901] 2 Ch. 52 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 474 ; 84 L. T. 440 ; 49 W. R. 498 C. A 1372, 1381 Bell V. Banks (1841) 3 M. & G. 258 3 Scott (N. R.) 497 149, 298 Bell V. M. Ry. Co. (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 287 ; 30 L. J. C. P. 273 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 1200 ; 4 L. T. 293 ; 9 W. R. 612 370 12 Jur. (N. S.) Bell V. Wilson (1866) L. R. i Ch. App. 303 35 L. J. Ch. 337 . . 782 263; 14L.T. 115; 14W. R.493 22 W. R. Bellairs 11. Bellairs (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 510 ; 43 L. J. Ch. 669 42 942 Bellamy, Re (1883) 25 Ch. D. 620 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 174 49 L. T. 708 ; 32 W. R.
Bedell
v.
J ; . .
.
W.
.135
&W.
nn
590
504
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixviii
TABLE OF CASES
fag
v.
Bellamy
Debenham
,
[1891]
Ch, 412
60 L.
J.
Ch. 166
64 L. T. 478
;
39W. R. 257 187 Bellamy . Metropolitan Board of Works (1883) 24 Ch. D. 387 52 L. J. Ch. .1132 870; 48. L. T. 801 47 J. P. 550; 31 W. R. 900C. A. Bellamy v. Wells (1891) 39 W. R. 158 ; 60 L. J. Ch. 156 ; 63 L. T. 635 . 402
;
Bellasis
v.
Burbriche (1696)
[1906]
i
Ld.
Raym. 170
;
Bellasis o.
Jem/).
Hardwicke 273
Benett,
C.
Re
...... ....
94 L. T. 72
;
613 1284
1106, 1380 C. (1862) 4 De G. F. & J. 259 1415 -Benjamin o. Storr (1874) L. R. 9 C. P. 400 ; 43 L. J. C. P. 162 ; 30 L. T. 362 ; 22 W. R. 631 328, 392. 403, 773 Bennet, Re [1903] 2 Ch. 136 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 524 ; 88 I.. T. 683 . . . 883 Bennet o. Easedale (:626) Cro. Car. 55 . . . 743 Bennett o. Allcott (1787) 2 T. R. 166 467 Bennett v. Mellor (1793) 5 T. R. 273 ; 2 R. R. 593 245 Bennett 0. Peninsular and Oriental Steamboat Co. (1848) 6 C. B. 775 . . 249
A
!).
75 L. J. Ch. 122
54
W.
R. 337
Benett
.
Wyndham
.....
; .
'
...
v. Powell (1855) 3 Drew. App. 326 24 L. J. Ch. 3 Eq. Rep. 1023 736; I Jur.(N. S.) 7195,3 W.R. 618 1152 Bennett v. Reeve (1740) Willes, 227 717 Bennett v. Stone [1903] i Ch. 509 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 240 88 L. T. 35 51 W. R. 338 . . Bennett 0. Turner (1840) 10 L. J. Ex-. 213 646 Bennett 0. Turner'(i84i) 7 M. & W. 226 762 Benson v. Chester (1799) 8 T. R. 396 717 Benson o. Maude (182 1) 6 Madd. 15 1270,1271 Bent . Bent (1861) 2 Sw. & Tr. 392 30 L. J. P. M. & A. 189 ; ; L. T. 120 ; 10 W. R. 448 I2O0 Eentinck, Re [1897] i Ch. 673 ; 66 L. J. Ch. 359 ; 76 L. T. 284 ; 45 W. R.
Bennett
397
Bentley's (Dr.) Case (1726) 2 Str. 913 Benyon v. Nettlefold (1850) 3 Mac. & G. 94 ; 20 L. J. Ch. 186 ; 15 Jur. 209 Bereblocko. Read (1590) 4 Rep. 59 b Beresford v. White (1914) 58 Sol. 607 ; 30 T. L. R. 591Jo.
C.
....... .......
.
1377 7 33 1376
A
i6e
Bergman, /m
I
G00&
....
;
5,2 1350
17 Jur. 1153
_.
;,
W.
R. 305
5
B.
.
&
C. 351;
.
8 D.
&
.323
53 ii6
R. 102
4 L. J. (O. S.)
'.
DeBernaleso. Fuller (1810) i4East, 590, p. ; zCamp. 426 ; 11R.R.755 . Bernina, The (1887) L. R. 13 App. C'as. 16 : L. R. 12 P. D. 58 56 L. J. Adjn. 65; 56 L. T. 450; 35 W. R. 214; 6 Asp. M. C. 112; 55 L. T.
;
Bernstein [1893] P. 292 ; 63 L. J. P. 3 ; 69 L. T. 513 ; 6 R. . . . . . 609 C. A. . . . . Berringer o. G. E. Ry. (1879) 4 C. P. D. 163 ; 48 L. J. C. P. 40c; 27 W. R. 681 . , , ,
781 Bernstein
333, 334
v.
Berry v. Heard (1622) Cro. Car. 242 Berthon v. Cartwright (1796) 2 Esp. 480 Berwick & Co. v. Price [19c 5] i Ch. 632 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 249 ; 92 L. T. no . Besant, Re (1879) 11 Ch. D. 508 48 L. J. Ch. 497 ; 40 L. T. 469 ; 27 W. R.
;
........
UQo
477 ^gg
^7,
759
I220
395 508
741
Beswickw. Cunden (1593) Cro. Eliz. 402. Beswick v. Smith (1907) 24 T. L. R. 169C.
......
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Bethune
Betteley
v.
; .
Ixix
v.
PAGE Bethune [1891] P. 205 ; 60 L. J. P. 18 63 L. T. 259 .1189 Read (1843) 4 Q. B. 517 3 G. & D. 561 ; 12 L. J. Q. B. 172
;
7 Jur- 507 Betterbeeti. Davis (1811) 3 Camp. 70 ; 13 R. R. 755 Bettesworth & Richer, Re (1883) 37 Ch. D. 535 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 749 ; 58 L. T. 796 ; 36 W. R. 544 ; 52 J. B. 740 Bettini v. Gye (1876) 45 L. J. Q. B. 209 ; l Q. B. D. 183 ; 34 L. T. 246 ; 24
'42s
ro8 186
148
W.
Betts Bette Betts
V. V.
R. 551
Gallais (1870) L. R. 10 Eq. 392 ; 22 L. T. 841 ; 18 W. R. 945 Gibbins (1834) 2 A. E. 57 ; 4 N. & M. 64 ; 4 L. J. K. B. i
.
378
237 Pickford [1906J 2 Ch. 87 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 483 ; 54 W. R..476 94 L. T. 363; 22T. L. R. 315 381 Betty, Re [1899] i Ch. 821 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 435 80 L. T. 675 752, 1 19, 1395 Bevanj). Habgood(i86o) I J. & H. 222; 8 W. R. 703 36 Sevan v. Webb [1905] i Ch. 620 74 L. J. Ch. 30c 53 W. R. r.51 ; 93 L. T. 1 125 298 Beverley's Case (1603) 4 Rep. 126 b 2 Inst. 14 123 b, 917, 977 Beverley, Re [1901] i Ch. 681 70 L. J. Ch. 295 84 L. T. 296 49 W. R. 1412 343 ; 17 T. L. R. 228 Bewick v. Whitfield (1734) 3 P. Wms. 268 577 Bewley . Atkinson (1879) 13 Ch. D. 283 49 L. J. Ch. 153 41 L. T. 603 28 W. R. 638C. A. 854, 856, 857 Bexwell . Christie (1776) Cowp. 395 230 Beyfus v. Lawley [1903] A. C. 411 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 781 89 L. T. 309 1393 Beynon, In the Goods o/[igoi] P. 141 84 L. T. 271 70 L. J. P. 31 65 4,1337 J. P. 246; I7,T. L. R. 324 Bickett 0. Morris (1866) L. R. i H. L. (Sc.) 47 778 L. T. 287 W. R. 445 C. A. Bidder v. Bridges (1887) 26 Ch. D. i 32 50 151 affirming 53 L. J. Ch. 4.7^ Bidder o. North Staffordshire Ry. Co. (1878) 4 Q. B. D. 412 40 L. T. 801 48 L. J. Q. B. 248 ; 27 W. R. 540 C. A. 707 11 Jur. (N. S.) 425 Biddle o. Bond (1865) 6 B. & S. 225 34 L. J. Q. B. 137 12 L. T. 178 ; J3 W. R. 561 204,233,425 Biddulph V. Ather (1755) 2 Wils. 23 414, 932 Biggs V. Hoddinott [1898] 2 Ch. 307 67 L. J Ch. 540; 79 L. T. 201 47 W. R. 84 14 T. L. R. 504C. A. 49, 83, 832 Bignellf. Buzzard (1858) 3 H. &N. 217; 27L. J. Ex. 355 Bigwood . Bigwood (1888) 13 P. D. 89 57 L. J. P. 80 58 L. T. 62 ^6 1188 W. R. 928 102 Bills. Bament (1841) 9M. & W. 36; II L. J. Ex. 81 36 BiUagc V. Southee (1852) 9 Ha. 534 ; 21 L. J. Ch. 472 16 Jur. 188 Bingham . Woodgate (1829) i Russ. & M. 32 ; Tam. 183 8 L. J. (O. S.) 606 Ch. 46 Binks V. S. Y. Ry. Co. (1862) 3 B. & S. 244 32 L. J. Q. B. 26 7 L. T. 350 1 1 W. R. 66 774 205 Binsteadc. Buck (1777) 2 Wm. Bl. 1117 Birch c. Birch [1902] P. 130 71 L. J. P. 58 ; 86 L. T. 364 ; 50 W. R. 437 ; 1350 18 T. L. R. 485 C. A 98 Birch o. Liverpool (1829) 9 B. & C. 392 i R. R. 228 642, 646, 763 Birch e. Wright (1786) i T. R. 378 A. 60 L. T. 369 37 W. R. 387 Birchall, Re (1889)^40 Ch. D. 436 Birch-Wolfe v. Birch (1870) L. R. 9 Eq. 683 39 L. J. Ch. 345 ; 23 L. T. 216 ;
.
&
0.
..........
.
...... .......
; ; ; ;
.
-525
....
. .
.812
576, 7^7
;
6i
L. J. Ch.
288
66 L. T. 274
40
W. R.
'357
359
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixx
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
V.
Bird
M.
&
P. 607
146 ; 29 R. R. 657 Bird V. Jones (1845) 7 Q. B. 742 15 L. J. Q. B. 82 ; Bird o. Lord Greville (1884) Cab. & E. 317 636 i W. Bl. 373, 387 Bird . Randall (lyfiz) 3 Burr. 1345 155,209,474 Birds. Smith (1848) 12 Q. B. 786; 17 L. J. Q. B. 309 12 Jur. 916 105 Birkbeck c.'Paget (1862) 31 Beav. 403 724 Birkett v. Bifkett (1908) 98 L. T. 540 24 T. L. R, 284 ; 52 Sol. Jo. 241 1184 Birkmyr o. Darnell (1705) i Salk. 27 2 Ld. Raym. 1085 98, 290 Birks . Trippett (166Q I Wms. Saund. 32 Birmingham Corporation v. Allen (1877} 6 Ch. D. 284 46 L, J. Ch. 673 37 L. T. 207; 25 W. R. 810 781 Birmingham, etc.. Land Co. o. L. & N. W. Ry. (1886) 34 Ch. D. 272, 275 56 L. J. Ch. 956 35 W. R. 173 C. A 55 L. T. 699 324 Birtwhistle v. Vardill (1835) ^ C). & F. 571 6 Bing. (1840) 7 Cli & F. 895 N. C. 385 9 Bligh (N. S.) 32 Westj 500 4 Jur. 1076 ; 2 Scott (N. R.) 828 1265, I206 Biscoe V. Jackson (1887) 35 Ch. D. 460 56 L. J. Ch. 540 56 L. T. 753 ; 35 W. R. 554 C. A. U12 Bishop, Ex parte (1880) 15 Ch. D. 400 50 L. J. Ch. 18 ; 43 L. T. 165 29 W. R. 144 294 Bishop V. Balkis Co. (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 77, 512 59 L. J. Q. B. 565 ; 39 W. R. 2 Meg. 292 541 99 Bishop o. Howard (1823) 2 B. & C. 100 3 D. & R. 293 i L. J. (0. S.) K. B. . 619 243 26 R. R. 291 Biss, Re [1903] 2 Ch. 40 72 L. J. Ch. 473 88 L. T. 403 1 125 51 W. R. 504 C. A. Bist o. L. & S. W. Rv. [1907] A. C. ioq ; 76 L. J. K. B. 703 96 L. T. 750 ^ 23 T. L. R. 47t 455 Blachford, Re (1884) 27 Ch. D. 676 1273 54 L. J. Ch. 215 33 W. R. 11 Blachford v. Dod (1831) 3 B. & Ad. 179 ; 9 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. 196 492, 493 Black V. Smith (1791) Peake, 88 3 R. R. 66r 109 Blackboirn v. Edgley (1719) i P. Wms. 600 991 Blackborough v. Davis (1701) i P. Wms. 41 ; i Salk. 38 ; Ld. Raym. 684 Com. 96 2 Eq. Cas. Abr. 242 1308, 1309 ^ Blackburn . Graves (1673) i Mod. 102 751 Haslam (1888) 21 Q. B. D. 144 57 L. J. Q. B. 479 36 W. R. Blackburn v. 6 Asp. M. C. 326 855 64 Blackburn Bobbin Co. u. Allenby & Sons [1918] 2 K. B. 467 87 L. J. K. B. 119 L. T. 215 1085 23 Com. Cas. 471 34 T. L. R. 508 C. A. 133 Blackburn Building Society v. Cunliffe, Brooks & Co. (1882) 22 Ch. D. 61 52 L. J. Ch. 92 48 L. T. 33 31 W. R. 98 C. A. 317 Blackhamc.Pugh (1846) 2C. B. 611 15 L. J. C. P. 290 Blackman v. Fysh [1892] 3 Ch. 209 60 L. J. Ch. 666 67 L. T. 802 ; 39 W. R. 520 2 R. I 44, 577, 658 'Blackmore v. White [1899] i Q. B. 293 68 L. J. Q. B. 180 ; 80 L. T. 79 47 W. R. 448 40s. 592 Blackwell, In the Gbods of (1877) 2 P. D. 72 46 L. J. P. 29 36 L. T. 413 25W. R. 305 1331 Blades v. Free (1829) 9 B. c& C. 167 4 M. & Ry. 282 7 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 211 59, 60, 238 Blades . Higgs (1861) 10 C. B.N. S. 713 30 L. J. C. P. 347 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.)
. . ;
... .......
; . . .
.
.115
...........
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; . . . .
.
: '
.518
82,436
II
;
H. L.
C. 621
20
C. B.
;
N.
13
W.
214 R. 927
S.
34 L. J. C. P.
.
^-
769,770,93^
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Blake Blake Blake Blake Blake
,
Ixxi
PAGE
V.
Bayne
v.
W. R. 555 C.
II.
1312
3+ ,367 817
4.74
v. v.
3 P.
Wms.
10
14 R. R.
,
235
;
.580
Blake v. Midland Ry. Co. (1852) 18 Q. B. 93 21 L. 16 Jur. 562 363 J. Q. B. 233 Blake o. Nicholson (18 14) 3 M. & S. 167' 224 Blake v. Peters (1863) i De G. J. & S. 345 ; i N. R. 503 9 Jur. (N. S.) 836 32 L. J. Ch. 200 ; 9 L. T. 247 ; II W. R. 409 557, 668 Blakemore v. Bristol & Exeter Ry. Co. (1858) 8 El. & Bl. 1035 . . 198, 199,
; .
.
331, 332
Blakeney
Hardie (1874) I. R. 8 Eq. 390 Blaker v. Herts & Essex Waterworks Co. (1889) 41 Ch. D. 399 3 Meg. 217 497 ; 60 L. T. 776 ; .37 W. R. 601 Blaker v. Wells (1873) 28 L. T. 21
.
;
....
;
189
58 L. J. Ch.
ion
591
Blaksley's Trusts,
Re
Blamford
v.
Blamford (1615)
48 L. T. 776
;
...
;
982
641
Blanchard,
Le
(i86i) 3 De G.F. & J. 131 ; 30 L. J. Ch. 516 505 ; 4 L. T. 426 ; 9 W. R. 647 Blanche v. L. & N. W. Ry. Co. (1876) 45 L. J. C. P. 521 ; 34 L. T. 667 ; 24 W. R. 808 C.
Re
C. P. D.
286
R.
123
Bland
9
v.
Bland (1866) L. R.
P.
& M.
&
237
35 L. J. P.
;
& M.
;
104
15
W.
1189
v.
;
Bland
Blane
Lipscombe (1854) 4 E.
B. 713 u.
3 C. L.
R. 261
24 L.
J.
Q. B.
I Jur. (N. S.) 707 745 Francis [1917] i K. B. 252 ; 86 L. J. K. B. 364 ; 115 L. T. 850 C. A. 629 Blaney . Hendricks (1771) 2 W. Bl. 761 ; 3 Wils. 205 . . . Blaymire v. Haiey (1840) 6 M. & W. 55 ; 9 L. J. Ex. 147 ; 4 Jur. 107 466 Bleckley, Injhe Goods 0/(1883) 8 P. D. 169 ; 52 L. J. P. 102 ; 47 J. P. 663 ; 31 W. R. 171 1251 Blenkinsopp v. Blenkinsopp (1850) 12 Beav. 568 ; 19 L. J. Ch. 425 ; 14 Jur. 1062, 1063 777 ; affirmed i De G. M. & G. 495 ; 21 L. J. Ch. 401 ; 16 Jur. 787 Blewett V. Tregonning (1835) 3 A. & E. 554 ; 5 Nev. & M. (K. B.) 308 ; i H. & W. 432 ; 4 L. J. K. B. 234 718 Blewitt, In the Goods o/' (i 880) 5 P. D. 1 1 6 ; 49 L. J. P. 3 1 ; 42 L. T. 329 ; 44 P. 768 i 28 W. R. 520 1238 J. Blight V. Hartnoll (1881) 19 Ch. D. 294 ; 51 L. T. Ch. 162 ; 45 L. T. 524 ; 30 ". . . W. R. S13C. A. 992 Blight V. Hartnoll (1883) 23 Ch. D. 218 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 672 ; 48 L. T. 543 ; 31
155
v.
.118
W. R. 535C.
A.
N. C. 183, 186 ; 5 Arn. 19 ; 7 L. J. C. P. 122 2 Jur. no Blissett V. Daniel (1853) 10 Ha. 193 ; i Eq. Rep. 484 ; 18 Jur. 122 ; 529 Bloodworth v. Gray (1844) 7 Man. & G. 334 ; 8 Scott (N. R.) 9 Bloss o. Holman (1586) Owen, 52 Blount V. Burrowf (1792) 4 Bro. C. C. 71 ; i Ves. J. 546 Blount V. Layard (1888) [1891] 2 Ch. 681 n. C. A 109 L. T. 913 Blow, Re [1914] I Ch. 233 83 L. J. Ch. 185 58 136; 30T. L. R. 117 C. A Blower o. Ellis (1886) 50 J. P. 326
;
& Aid.
876
D.
&
1267 622
394
i
W.
.
R. 39
504; 524
....'.... ....
. ; ;
Sol. Jo.
1421
770
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
v.
Blower
G.
W. Ry.
41 L. J. C. P. 368
; ;
26'
Bloxam
L. T. 883; 20.W. R. 776 v. Favre (1883) 8 P. D. loi ; L. J. P. 42 ; 47 J. P. 377 610 ; affirmed on appeal (1884) 9 P. D. 130 ; 53 L, J. P. 26
250
31
R. 50 L. T.
1243
'
W.
766
A
;
75 L. J. Ch. 561
;
94 L. T. 818
;
& T. L. R.
.
570
'^^''
Blunden
Blunt Blunt
o. .
v.
Baugh
W.
Jones, 315
Littleton, 372
640,
.751
'
.....
; . . . ;
....
...
.
'
Bonomi
C. 503 34 L. J. ;
......
. .
523
Ex. 65
Booth, Re [1900] I Ch. 768 ; 69 L. J. Ch. 474 ; 48 W. R. 566 Booth V. Alcock (1873) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 663 ; 29 L. T. 231 21 W. R. 743 Booth o. Arnold [1895] i Q. B. 571 ; 64 L. J. Q. B. 443 ; 72 L. T. 310 ; 43 W. R. 360 14 R. 326 .
. . ;
,
368 666
.671
.504
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Booth Booth Booth
V.
Lxxiii
V.
Boo th (1838) r Beav. 125 8 L. J. Ch. 39 2 Tur. 0^8 Couh ^.on (1870) L. R. 5 Ch. App. 684 39 L. J. Ch 622
;
; ;
PAGE
,a-,.
;
18
W.
R.
V. Smith (1884) 14 Q. B. D. 318 742' 54 L. J. Q.'b. 119 ; ei L C. 33 W. R. 14 Bootle V. BlundeU" (1815) 1 Mer. 193 ; 19 Ves. 517 15 R. R. q,' Bootonz). Rochester (Bishop) (161 8) Hutt. 24 Boots V. Grundy (i, 100) 82 L. T. 769 48 W. R. 638 Bbreham, i?e(i8s3)' 22L- J. Q. B. 116 Boreham v. Boreham (1866) L. R. i P. & M. 77 ; 35 L. 14 J. P. & M. 49
I A
f
'
..'.'.'
.
. ' ' '
:
):>
'
718
.11.
'
iy4
^q,
1228
Borland's Trustee o. Steel Bros. [1901] i Ch. 279 70 L. T Ch ci 40 R '\' ^\ 120; 17T. L. R.45; : Borries v. Imperial Ottoi nan Bk. (1873) L. R, g C. P t,% r P -iV, T J ** J' -3. ' 29 L. T. 689 ; 22 W. R. 92 : Borwick's Settlement, Re ['igiej 2 Ch. 304 85 L. J. Ch. 7-!2 iie L f 187 60 Sol. Jo. 567; 32 T. L.R. 583 ^' Bostock . Smith (1864) 34 .Beav. 57 Boston Deep Sea Co. o.Ansell (lS!88) 39 Ch.D. 339; 59 L.T. 345. Bosvile B. A.-G. (1887) 12 P. DV 177 ; 56 L. J. P. 97 57 L. T. 88 36'w. R.
. .
'
t
'
,000
......
; ; ;
..'.'/;
33 L. T. 150;
L.
.
,^,^
ii-,a
2it
Bothamley
v.
23
W.
'
R.
''''
K.
.
B. 584;
.
'77
.
T.
K.
.
b'^i^i'-'
'
.
ii.;24T.L.R.262
Boughton
562
V.
qo\'t^'
^^.
'
.^^
J2i;6
Knight (1873) L. R. 3 P.
& M.
64
42 L.
.
J. P.
25
28 L.
'
T
'
Boulcott, ii (iQii) 104 L. T. 205; 55 Sol. Jo. 313 Boulter, Re [1918] 2 Ch. 40 ; 87 L Ch. 385 ; 1 18 L. T. 783 ! J. Boulter . Clarke (1747) Buller's Niai Prius 16. Boulting V. Boulting (1864) 3 Sw. & Tr. 329 ; 33 L. J. P. M. & A.\j /' . 779 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 182 12 W. R. 389 .
. . ; .
.q.
'.
^6
.^g
.^,
; '
L T
^,
H.&N.
564; 27L.
.
J. E.t. 117
.
(N.?.)202; 13W.R.497 421 Bourne 0. Gatliff (1844) II CI. & F. 45; 8 Scott (N. R.) 604 .251 Bourne v. Swan & Edgar, Ltd. [1903] i Ch. 2ii ; 72 L. J. Ch. 168 87 L T 589 ; 51 W. R. 213 ; 19 T. L. R. 59 ; 20 R. P. C. 105 1029 Bourne . Taylor (1808) 10 East, 189 ; 10 R. R. 267 594 Bovey c. Smith (1682) I Vern. 84; 2 Ch. Ca. 124 871 Bovill V. Endle [1896] i Ch. 648 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 542 ; 44 W. R. 523 818, 819, 829 ' Bowden o. Henderson (1854) 2 Sm. & G. 360 Bowditch V. Balchin (1850) 5 Exch. 378 ; 19 L. J. Ex. 337 .og Bowen, Re [1893] 2 Ch. 491 62 L. J. Ch. 68i ; 61 L. T. 789 41 W. R. 535 ;
.'
.
L. T. 34 ; 38 W. R.- 167 Bourne, iJe [1906] 2 Ch. 427; 75 L. J. Ch. 779 ; 95 L. T. 131 ; 54W. . . . . C. A. . Bourne v. Fosbrooke (1865) 18 C. B. N. S. 515 ; 34 L. J. C. P 164
;
. . . . .
_
'. '.
.f'
744
J,-,
R.'ssg
_
n
.
Tur
....
' '
. .
.'
.'
R- 529
;
Bowen o. Edwards (1660) I Cha. Rep. 117 Bowen 0. Hall (1881) 6 Q. B. D. 333 50 L. J. W. R. 367 4S J- P- 373 Bowen v. Phillips [1897] i Ch. 174 66 L. J. W. R. 286
;
;
....
;
.'
1077
g^i
Q. B. 305
Ch. 165
, ;
44 L. T. 75
39
:
479
,332
75 L. T. 628
. .
.
45
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxiv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
. . . i
11 L. J. Ch. 287 ; 6 Jur. 681 Cooper (1842) 2 Ha. 408 o. Peate (1876) i Q. B. D. 321 ; 45 L. J. Q. ,B. 446 35 L. T. 321 Bowes' (Sir Thomas). Case (1670) Vin.Ab. X, 400 . Bowes V. East London Waterworks (1818) 3 Madd. 375 23 R. R. 84 Bowes, Re (1887) 37 Ch. D. 128 57 L. J. Ch. 455 ; 58 L. T. 309 ; 36 W. R.
o.
; .
.
Bower Bower
186
354 642
1127 1366
393
Bowker
33
o.
Evans (1885)
R.
15 Q. B. D. 565
54 L.
W.
695C. A
;
J.
Q. B. 421 53
.
5-3
L. T. 801
362
73 L. J. Ch. 810
;
W.
R. 270J 91 L. T.
.
573 C. A. 1135,1136 Bowles' (Lewis) Case (161 5) II Rep. 79 b, 80 a .651,659,786,787 . 661 Bowles, Re [1902] 2 Ch. 650 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 822 ; 51 W. R. 124 Bowles, Re [1905] i Ch. 371 1077 74 L. J. Ch. 338 92 L. T. 556 Bowlston V. Hardy (1597) Cro. Eliz. 547. 360, 690, 703 Bowser v. Maclean (i860) 2 De G. F. & J. 415 ; 30 L. J. Ch. 273 ; 6 Jur. (N. S.) 1220; 3 L. T. 456; 9 W. R. 112 594,780 Boxall V. BoxaU (1884) 27 Ch. D. 220 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 838 ; 51 L. T. 771 32 W. R. 896 1351 Boxsius V. Goblet Freres [1894] i Q. B. 842 63 L. J. Q. B. 401 70 L. T. 368 42 W. R. 392 58 J. P. 670 505, 517 Boyce v. Paddington Council [1903] i Ch. 109, 114 ; 2 Ch. 557 ; 72 L. J. Ch. T. L. R. 648 ; 19 89 'L. T. 383 SI W. R. 109 67 J. P. 23 695 . . . 328, 392 affirmed [1906] A. C. i 102 Boydell . Drummond (1809) 11 East, 142 ; 2 Camp. 157 ; 10 R. R. 540 Boydell v. Jones (1838) 4 M. & W. 446 7 Dowl. 210 i H. & H. 408 524 Boyle, In the Goods 0/(1864) 3 Sw. & Tr. 426 ; 33 L. J. P. 109 ; 10 L. T. 541 1334 Boyle o. Tamlyn (1827) 6 B. & C. 329 ; 9 Dow. & Ry. (K. B.) 430 ; 5 L. J. - . (O. S.) K. B. 134 30 R. R. 343 714, 783 Boyntun 0. Boyntun (1784) I Cox Eq. ,106 1400 Boyse v. Rossborough (1857) 6 H. L. C. i 26 L. J. Ch. 256 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 1259 373 ; 5 W. R. 414 Brabant & Co. v. King [1895] A. C. 632 11 R. 517 ; 64 L. J. P. C. 161 72L. T. 785; 44W. R. 157 203 Brabant v. Wilson (1865) L. R. i Q. B. 44 ; 6 B. & S. 979 35 L. J. Q. B. 49 ; 12 Jur. (N. S.)24; 13L. T. 319; 14W. R. 28 606 Brace v. Calder [1895] 2 Q. B. 253 64 L. J. Q. B. 582 ; 14 R. 473 ; 72 L. T.
. . ;
.....
; ; .
. .
....
. ;
......
; ;
214.215 Marlborough (Duchess of) (17^8) 2 P. Wms. 491 759 Bracegirdleo. Heald (1818) I B. & Aid. 722 208 19 R. R. 442 Bradburn v. G. W. Ry. (1874) L. R. 10 Ex. i 44 L. J. Ex. 9 31 L. T. 464'; . . 23 W. R. 48 Bradburnei). Botfield(i845) 14M. &W. 559 ; 14L. J. Ex. 330 156 Bradford v. Brownjohn (1868) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 711 38 L. J. Ch. 10 ; 18 L. T. 388; 16 W. R. 1178 ,. . 596 Bradford Corporation v. Ferrand [1902] 2 Ch. 655 71 L. J. Ch. ,859 87 L. T. 388; 67 J. P. 21 51 W. R. 122; 18T. L. R. 830 Bradford Corporation v. Myers [1916] i A. C. 242 ; 85 L. J. K. B. 146 114 80 J. P. 121 L. T. 83 60 Sol. Jo. 74 ; 32 T. L. R. 14 L. G. R. 130
Brace
v.
; . .
.
829r59J-P-%3
....
; . . . . . . ; . .
.371
.
.403
74 Bradford (Mayor of) o. Pickles [1895] A. C. 587 64 L. J. Ch. 759 ; 11 R. 286 ; 73 L. t. 353 ; 44 W. R. 190 ; 60 J. P. 3-H. L. (E.) . 335, 393 Bradlaugh v. Newdegate (1883) 11 Q. B. D. i 52 L. J. Q. B. 454 ; 31 W. R. 79' 496) 497) 498 Bradley v. Carntt [1903] A. C. 253 ; 72 L. J. K. B. 471 ; 88 L. T. 633 51 T. L. R. 466 W. R. 636 19 831,959
; . ; ; ;
ii3-H.L.(E.)
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Bradky
Bradley
v. 0.
Ixxv
PAGE
.
o.
v.
Y. Ry. Co. (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 189 44 L. J. C. P. 148 ; 23 W. R. 310 336 Bradshaw ._Lawson (1791) 4 T. R. 443 584,605,691 Brady c. Giles (1835) i Moo. & Rob. 494 351 Brady . Todd (1861) 9 C. B. N. S. 592 ; 30 L. J. C. P. 223 7 Jur. (N. S.) 827; 4L. T. 212; 9 W. R. 483 59 Brady o. Warren [1900] 2 Ir. Rep. (Q. B. D.) 632 35S, 360 Brail, Re [1893] 2 Q. B. 381 62 L. J. Q. B. 457 69 L. T. 323 ; 41 W. R. 623 ; 10 Moirrell, i66 ; 5 R. 440 1070 Bramhall . Hall (1764) 2 Ed. 219 870 Brandao J). Barnett (1846) 12CI. & F. 787 3 C. B. 519 205,962 Brandon o. Brandon (1862) 31 L.J. Ch. 47; 5 L.T. 339 9 W. R. 825 751 Brandon v. Nesbitt (1794) 6 T. R. 23 ; 3 R. R. 109 31A Brandon v. Robinson (i8ii) 18 Ves. 429 i Rose, 197 44 Brandts v. Dunlop [1905] A. C. 454 74 L. J. K. B. 898 93 L. T. 495 21 T. L. R. 710 II Com. Cas. i 1051 Brass v. Maitland (1856) 6 E. & B. 471 26 L. J. Q. B. 49 2 Jur. (N. S.) 710 4 W. R. 647 , Brassey o. Chalmers (1852) 16 Beav. 223 4 De G. M. & G. 528 872 Brecon (Mayor) v. Edwards (1862) i H. & C. 51 ; 31 L. J. Ex. 368 8 Jur. 6 L. T. 293 (N. S.) 461 . Bremer v. Freeman (1857) 10 Moo. P. C. 306 1245 Brcnchley v. Higgins (1901) 70 L. J. Ch. 788 83 L. T. 751 36 Brentwood Brick Co., Re (1876) 4 Ch. D. 562 46 L. J. Ch. 554 36 L. T. 840 343 ; 25 W. R. 481 C. A Brett o. Cumberland (1617) Cro. Jac. 521 1365 i D. & L. 383 12 L. J. Ex. 448 ; Brewer 0. Dew (1843) 1 1 M. & W. 625 366, 413 7 Jur- 953 Brice v. Bannister (1878) 3 Q. B. D. 569 47 L. J. Q. B. 722 ; 38 L. T. 739 ; 26 W. R. 670 C. A 1050 Briceo. Wilson (1834) 3 L. J. K. B. (N. S.)93; 3 N. &M. 512. 318 C. Ch. Ca. 181 Bridge o. Brown (1843) 2 Yo. & 1402 Bridger, In jbe Goods 0/(1878) 4 P. D. 77; 47 L. J. P. 46; 39 L. T.
;
&
31 L. T. 847
14 L. J. C. P. 222 4 R. R. 7
....
;
9 Jur. 599
;
410
43,931
S.
344
;
-!i
L. J. C. P. 273
.
6 L. T.
318,1182
.
25 R. R. 127.
1224 673
....
.......
; .
....
;
.
.259
.
.695
..
;
......
;
.
.
123 1335 Bridger o. Savage (1885) 15 Q. B. D. 363 54 L. J. Q. B. 464 53 L. T. 129 ; 312 33 W. R. 891 49 J. P. 725 Bridges v. Hawksworth (1851) 21 L. J. Q. B. 75 411, 417, 15 Jur. 1079. 424, 77h 9^1) 936 616 Bridges . Hitchcock (171 5) 5 Bro. P. C. 6 L. J. Ex. 246 Bridgland v. Shapter (1839) 5 M. & W. 375 8 1264 Bridle, Re (1879) 4 C. P. D. 336 15 L. T. 643 ; 15 Bridport Old Brewery Co., Re (1867) L. R. 2 Ch. 191 W. R. 291 9 .1115 Brier, Re (1882) 26 Ch. D. 238 ; 51 L. T. 133 33 W. R. 20 C. A. 408,412 Brierly 0. Kendall (1852) 17 Q. B. 937 ;> 21 L. J. Q. B. 161 1382 Briers v. Goddard (1617) Hob. 250 22 L. T. 212 761 Briggs V. Jones (1870) L. R. 10 Eq. 92 14 Briggs V. Oliver (1866) 4 H. & C. 403 35 L. J. Ex. 163 5 14 L. T. 412 33 W. R. 658
; ; ; ; . ; . .
-695
....
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxvi
TABLE OF CASES
.
. . Briggs o. Sutlers (1920) Tmei newspapet, December 7th . 313 Briggs V. Wilson (1853) 5 De M. & G. 12 ; 17 Beav. 330 ; 2 Eq. R. 153 . 1383 Bright V. Walker (1834) i C. M. & R. 211 ; 4 Tyr. 502 ; 3 L. J. Ex. 250 . 850 Brigstock v. Brigstock (1878) 8 Ch. D. 357 ; 47 L. J. Ch. 817 ; 38 L. T. 760 ; 26 W. R. .761 574 Bringloe 71. Morrice (1687) i Mod. 210 200 Brinsmead B..,Brinsm6ad (Ltd.) (1896) 13 T. L. R. 3 C. A. ; . . 1029 Brinsmead v. Brinsmead (1913) S7 Sol. Jo. 716 ; 29 T. L. R. 706 C. A. 1029 Brinsmead v. Harrison (1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 584 ; L. R. 7 C. P. 547 ; 41 L. J. C. P. 190 ; 27 L. T. 99 ; 20 W. R. 784 336, 421, 425 Brintons 1). Turvey [1905] Ai C. 230 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 610 ; 93 L. T. 357 ; 53 W. R. 612 ; 21 T. L. R. 490 456 Bristol Aerated Bread Co. o. Maggs (1890) 59 L. J. Ch. 472 ; 44 Ch. D. 616 ; 62 L. T. 416 ; 38 W. R. 393 . 89 Bristol Bank v. M.Hy. Co. [1891] 2 Q. B. 653, 663, 664 ; 61 L. J. Q. B. 115 ; . 65 L. T. 234 ; 40 W. R. 148 ; 7 Asp. M. C. 69 C. A. 417, 419, 425 Bristol Cash Co. v. Lamson [1908] i K. B. 1006 ; 77 L. J. K. B. 649 ; 98 L. T. 875 . . 498 Bristol QVIarquis) ?). Beck (igo6) 96 L. T. 55 529 Bristow . Cormican (1878) L. R. 3 App. Cas. 641 702 Bristow V. Skirrow (1859) 27 Beav. 585 867 Bristow V. Warde (1794) 2 Ves. Jr. 336 ; 2 R. R. 235 . 867, 876, 1279 Britain v. Rossiter (1882) 48 L. J. Ex. 362 ; 11 Q. B. D. 123 ; 40 L. T. 240 ; 27 W. R. 482-C. 99, 100 British Goldfields bf W. Africa, In re [1899] 2 Ch. 7 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 412 ; 80 L. T. 638 ; 47 W. R. 552 ; 6 Manson, 334r-C. A 367 British India Steam Navigation Co. 0. Inland Reveniie (1881) 7 Q. B. D. 165 ; L. J. Q. B. 517; 44L. T. 378; 29 W. R. 610 50 1007 British Motor Syndicate o. Taylor & Sons [1901] i Ch. 122 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 21 ; 83 L. T. 419 ; 49 W. R. 183 ; 17 T. L.-R. 17 ; 17 R. P. C. 723 C. A. . 1017 British Mutual Investment Co. v. Smart (1875) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 567 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 695 ; 32 L. T. 849 ; 23 W. R. 800 1372 British S. Africa Co. o. De Beers [1910] 2 Ch. 502 ; 103 L. T. 4 54 Sol. Jo. 1013 679 ; 26 T. L. R. 59 1 C. A, British Union, &c. v. Rawson [1916] 2 Ch. 476 ; 85 L. J. Ch. 769 ; 115 L. T. 331 ; 60 Sol. Jo. 679 ; 32 T. L. R. 665 C. A 141 British Waggon Co. v. Lea (1879) 49 L. J. Q. B. 321 ; 5 Q. B. D. 149 ; 42 L. T. 437 ; 28 W. R. 349 ; 44 J. P. 440 . . . . 1 10 Britten o. G. N. Ry. Co. [1899] i Q. B. 243 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 75 ; 79 L. T.
.
....
'
......
.
....
640
Broad Broad
(1839) 5 Bing. (N. C.) 722 ; 8 Scott, 40 ; 8 L. J. C. P. 357 . -o, Thomas (1830) 7 Bing. 99 ; 4 M. & P. 732 ; 4 Car. & P. 338 59 L. J. (0. S. ) C. P. 32
v. o.
v.
Ham
...
Broadbent Broadbent
290
Wilks (1742) Wils. 360 Broadwood v. Granara (1854) 10 Exch. 417 ; 24 L. J. Ex. i 3 W. R. 25 ; 3 C. L. R. 177 19 Brockbank v. Whitehaven Junction Ry. (J862) 7 H. & N. 834
o.
; i
Broadbent
............ .......
Ramsbotham
;
Ledward (1839)
A.
&
.....
;
25 L. J. Ex. 115
W. R.
247
;
31 L. J.
Ex. 472
349 Brocklebank
Thompson
72 L. J. Ch. 626
;
19 T. L. R. 285
4561'"
3945401
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Ixxvii
PAGE
Broderick v. L. C. C. [1908] z K. B. 807 77 L. ; J. K. B. 1 127 ; 99 L. T. 569 24 T. L. R. 822 456 Brodie v. Brodie [1917] P. 271 86 L. J. P. 140 117 L. T. 542 62 Sol. Jo. 71 33 T. L. R. 525 1179 Brogden, Re (1888) 38 Ch. D. 546 59 L. T. 650 37 W. R. 84 C. A.. 1404, 1419 Brogden o. Metro. Ry. Co. (1877) 2 App. Cas. 666 H. L. (E.) . .90, 91 Bromage o. Prosser (1825) 4 B. & C. 247 6 D. & R. 296 i Car. & P. 475 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 203 28 R. R. 241 3 335, 507 Bromfield v. Smith (1805) 6 East, 530 619 Bromfield v. Williamson (1654) Styles. 407 763 Bromley . Bromley (1793) 2 Add. 158 n 1193 Bromley v. Holland (1802) 7 Ves. 3 Coop. 9 240 Brook V. Brook (1861) 9 H. L. C. 193 4 L. T. 93 7 Jur. (N. S.) 422 ; 9 W. R. 461 i affirming 3.Sm. & G. 481 27 L. J. Ch. 401 1173 Brook V. Bulkeley (1752) 2 Ves. Sen. 498 616 Brook V. Copeland (1794) i Esp. 203 446 Brook V. Willet (1793) 2 H. Bl. 224 717, 718 Brooke v. Brooke (1858) 25 Beav. 342 27 L. J. Ch. 639 4 Jur. (N. S.) 472 1184 Brooke v. Brooke [1912] P. 136 ; 81 L. J. P. 75 106 L. T. 766 28 T. L. R. 1191,1192 314; 56 Sol. Jo. 382 Brooke v. Kent (1840) 3 Moo. P. C. 334 1249 Brooke v. Lewis (1822) 6 Madd. 358 23 R. R. 246 1268, 1270 Brookes, Re [1914] i Ch. 558 83 L. J. Ch. 424 ; no L. T. 691 58 Sol. Jo. 286 1412 Brooks bie's Case (1590) Cro. Eliz. 173 . . 727, 980 Broom !). Hall (1859) 7C. B. N. S. 503 302 Brotherton, Re (1908) 77 L. J. Ch. 58 97 L. T. 880 679 Broughten's Case (1482) Y. B. 22 Edw. II., Pasch. pi. 15 . 647 Broughton v. Jackson (1852) 18 Q. B. 378 ; 21 L. J. Q. B. 265 16 Jur. 886 442 Broun v. Kennedy (1863) 33 L. J. (N. S.) Ch. 71, 342 36 Brown's Case (1581) 4 Rep. 22 a 653, 1314, 1371 Brown, Re (1886) 32 Ch. D. 597 ; 55 L. J. Ch. 556 ; 54 L. T. 789 867 Brown v. Anderson [1894] I Q. B. 164 10 R. 47 ; 42 W. R. 236 58 J, P. . 213 397 Brown v. Andrew (1849) 18 L. J. Q. B. 153 13 Jur. 938 229 Annaudale (1842) 8 CI. & F. 437 Brown v. 1015 . Brown . Boorman (1844) II CI. & F. 44 ; 3 Q. B. 511 Brown v. Brine (1875) 1 Ex. D. 5 ; 45 L. J. Ex. 129 ; 33 L. T. 703 ; 24 W. R.
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
.
'
....... ....
; ; ; . .
.
....
; . . ; .
....
.
.331
177
42
D. 46 ; 35 L. J. P. M. & A. 13 13 L. T. 645 ; 1188 1 1 Jur. (N. S.) 1027 ; 14 W. R. 149 440 Brown . Chapman (1848) 17 L. J. C. P. 329 6 C. B. 365 ; 12 Jur. 799 828 Brown v. Cole (1845) 14 Sim. 427 ; 14 L. J. Ch. 167 Brown v. Collins (1883) 25 Ch. D. 56 53 L. J. Ch. 368 ; 49 L. T. 329 1230 Brown V. Dunstable Corporation [1899] 2 Ch. 378 68 L. J. Ch. 498 ; 80 L. T. ~ 710, 850 650 ; 63 J. P. 519 ; 47 W. R. 538 15 T. L. R. 386 .1312 Brown v. Farndell (1690) Carth. 51 Brown v. Gellatly (1867) L. R. 2 Ch. App. 751 ; 17 L. T. 131 ; 15 W. R. 1188 1121, 1122 Brown v. Hawkes [1891] 2 Q. B. 718 ; 65 L. T. 108 ; 55 J. P. 823 ; 60
Brown
o.
Brown
(1865)
P.
&
L.J.Q.B. 332
JSrown
V.
Hedges (1708)
.
v.
v.
.... ....
i
490, 493
Salk. 290
Johnson (1842) 10 M.
& W.
331
Car.
& M.
440
iiL.
J.
Ex. 373
Naime
(1839) 9 C.
&
P. 204
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxviii
TABLE OF CASES
Raindle (1796) 3 Ves. 256
'
v.
Royal
El.
110,130,132 7 W. R. 479 ; Savage (1859) 4 Drew. 635 5 Jur. (N. S.) 1020 ; 7 W. R. 571 1153 v. Shore (1689) i Show. 25 1312 v. Skirrow [1902] P. 3 18 T. L. R. 59 71 L. J. P. 19 ; 85 L. T. 645 1238 v. Smi|h (1853) .13 C. B. 596 i C. L. R. 4 22 L. J. C. P. 151 17 I W. ^. 288 Jur. 807 504 Brown 0. Tighe (1834) 2 CI. & F. 396 617 Browne 0. Brundt [1902] i K. B.' 696 71 L. J. K. B. 367 86 L. T. 625 50 W. R. 654 244 Browne o. Dawson (1840) 12 A. &E. 624 ; 4P. &D. 355 ; 10 L. J. Q. B. 7. .383, 390 Browne o. Dunn (1893) 6 R. 67 517 Browne i>. Flower [191 1] i Ch. 219; 80 L. J. Ch. 181 103 L. T. 557 55 " " 635,711,712 Sol. Jo. 108 Browne v. Groombridge (1819) 4 Madd. 495 20 R. R. 326 1391 Browne 0. Stoughton (1846) 14 Sim. 369. 1076 Browning 0. Beston (1556) Plowd. 131 48 Browning v. Browning [1911] P. 161 80 L. J. P. 74; 104 L. T. 750 sub om. B. o. B., 55 Sol. Jo. 462 1188 . Browning o. Provincial Ins. Co. (1875) L. R. 5 P. C. 263 ; 28 L. T. 853 21 W. R. 587 . 64 Brownlie o. iCampbell,(i88o) L. R. 5 App. Ca. 925 1 . 543 Brownrigg v. Pike (1882) 7 P. D. 61 ; 51 L. J. P. 29 46 L. T. 821 46 J. P. 360 ; 30 W. R. 567 1329 Bruce, Re [1905] 2 Ch. 372 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 578 ; 93. L. T. 119,; 54 W. R. 60 8go Bruce, Re [1908] 2 Ch. 682 ; 78 L. J. Ch. 56 ; 99 L. T. 704 C. A. 1276 Bruce 0. Hunter (18 1 3) 3 Camp. 467 . 116 Brudnel's Case (1592) 5 Rep. 9 573 Bruen . Roe (1667) Sid. 264 415 Bruerton o. Rainsford (1583) Cro. Eliz. 15 6io
(N. S.) 1255
v.
; .
.
.."....
&
El. 853
; .
.
.......
28 L. J. Q. B. 275
;
PAGE
1092
5 Jur.
".
Brummel
1392
J.
Q. B. 244
4 Dow.
&
L. 43
Jur- 895
; .
-53
.
Bruner 0. Moore [1904] i Ch. 305 73 L. J. Ch. 377 ; 89 L. T. 738 ; 52 W. R. 295; 20T. L.R. 125 Brunning, Re [1909] i Ch. 276 ; 78 L. J. Ch. 75 99 L. T. 918 . Brunsden 0. Humphrey (1884) 14 Q. B. D. 141 53 L. J. Q. B. 476 ; 51 L. T. 529; 32 W. R. 944; 49 J. P. 4 C. A. Brunswick (Duke) v. Harmer (1849) 14 Q. B. 185 19 L. J. Q. B. 20 14
;
.
69.
995
.373
505, 506 Hall (1841) i Q. B. 792 10 L. J. Q. B. 258 i Gal. & Dav. 207 ; 6 Jur. 340 708 Bryan, In the Esme o/[i9o7] P. 125,; 76 L. J. P. 30 ; 96 L. T. 584 1247 Bryant 0. Busk (1827) 4 Russ. i 28 R. R. i 189 Bryant o. Flight (1839) 5 M. & W. 114 ; 2 H. & H. 84 8 L. J. Ex. 189 3 Jur. 6^1 Bryant v. Herbert (1878) 3 C. P. D. 3,89 47 L. J. C. P. 670 ; 39 L. T. 17 26 W. R. 898 C. A Bryant v. Lefever (1879) 4 C. P. D. 172 ; 48 L. J. C, P. 380 40 L. T. 579 ; 27 W. R. 592 C. A 711; 850 Brydges v. Brydges (1796) 3 Ves. 125 753 Metropolitan Co. (1858) 3 De G. & J. 123 Bryon v. lOpS* Buccleuch (Duke of) 0. Metropolitan Board of Works (1871) L. R. j H. L. 418; 41 L.J. Ex. 137; 27 L.t. I 773
-
Jur-
"o
Brunton
0.
.208
:
.422
.......
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Bucdeuch (Duke
of) v.
Ixxix
PAGE
39 L. J. Ch.
441 ; 23 L. T. 102 Buchan's Case (1879) L. R. 4 App. Cas. 549 L- R- 512 Buckell V. Blenkhorn (1845) 5 Ha. 131 Buckeridge 0. Ingram (1795) 2 Ves. Jun. 652
782
6 Rettie (H. L.) 44;
16 Sc.
Buckland v. Johnson (1854) 15 C. B. 145 204 i8 Jur. 775 2 W. R. 565 Buckler . Harvey (i 594) Cro. Eliz. 450
; ; ;
Buckley, Re (1883) 22 Ch. D. 583 52 L. J. Ch. 439 48 L. T. 109 ; 31 W. R. 376 Buckley v. Gross (1863) 3 B. & S. 566 32 L. J. Q. B. 129 9 Jur. (N. S.) 986; 7L. T. 743; II W. R. 465
; ;
...... .......
.
1367 870
15,1319
421
2 C. L. R. 704;
23 L. J. C. P.
656
1271
Buckley
(1808) 10 East, 139 Buckworth v. Thirkell (1785) 3 Bos. & P. 652 n. ; 10 Moore, 235 u. ; 4 Dougl. 323 ; 28 R. R. 674 Budd-Scott V. Daniell [1902] 2 K. B. 351 ; 71 L. J. K. B. 706 ; 87 L. T. 392 ; 18 T. L. R. 675 Bufec. Turner (1815) 6 Taunt. 338 Bullen B. Denning (1826) 5 B. & C. 842 ; 8 Dow. & Ry. (K. B.) 657 ; 4 L. J. (O. S.)K. B. 314; 29 R. R. 431 BuUer v. Harrison (1777) 2 Cowp. 565 Bulli Coal Co. v. Osborne [1899] A. C. 351 ; 68 L. J. P. C. 49 ; 80 L. T. 430 ; 47W. R. 545; 15T. L. R. 257 Bullock, Re [1915] i Ch. 493 ; 84 L. J. Ch. 463 ; 112 L. T. 1119 ; 59 Sol. Jo.
v.
Kenyon
.......
;
."
418
621
1313
.......
441
Bullock's Settled Estates, Re (1904) 91 L. T. 651 Bullock V. Downes (i860) 9 H. L. C. i ; 3 L. T. 194; affirming 25 Beav. 4 Bund c. Green (1879) 12 Ch. D. 819; 28 W. R. 275 Bunn V. Channen (1813) 5 Taunt. 243 Bunn 0. Markham (1816) 2 Marsh. 532 ; 7 Taunt. 224 ; Holt, 352 ; 17 R. R.
.
............
;
76
661
497
939> 1291
Burchall v. Wilde [1900] i Ch. 551 ; 69 L. J. Ch. 314; 82 L. T. 576; 48 W. R. 491 ; 16 T. L. R. 257C. A Burdick v. Garrick (1870) L. R. 5 Ch. App. 233 ; 39 L. J. Ch. 369 18 W. R. 387 Surge V. Ashley [1900] i Q. B. 744 ; 69 L. J. Q. B. 538 ; 82 L. T. 518 ; 48 W. R. 438 Surges V. Lamb (1809) 16 Ves. 174 Burgess v. Booth [1908] 2 Ch. 648 78 L. J. Ch. 32 j 99 L. T. 677 C. A. Burgess v. Burgess (1853)3 De G. M. & G. 896; 22 L. J. Ch. 675;
17 Jur. 292
v.
.
1030
1386
1029 Clements (1815) 4 M. & S. 306 ; Holt, 211 u. ; i Stark. 251 n. 16 R. R. 473 24s Burgess v. Thompson (1836) 5 A. & E. 532 585 1103,1326 Burgess 0. Wheate (1757) I Ed. 177 ; i W. Bl. 123 . . in6 Burke, Re [1908] 2 Ch. 248 77 L. J. Ch. 597 ; 99 L. T. 86 Burke v. Green (1814) 2 Ball & B. 517 498 . Burling v. Read (1850) 11 Q. B. 904 ; 19 L. J. Q. B. 291 383 61 58 L. J. Ch. 664 Burnaby's Settled Estates, Re (1889) 42 Ch. D. 621 L. T. 22 7S4 Burnaby b. Baillie (1889) 42 Ch. D. 282 ; 58 L. J. Ch. 842 ; 61 L. T.634; 38 . 1207, 1208 W. R. 125 Burnand . Rodocanachi (1882) L. R. 7 App. Cas. 333 ; 51 L. J, Q. B. 548 ; . 307, 318 4 Asp. M. C. 576 47 L. T. 277 31 W. R. 65-H. L. (E.)
..........
; .
310 786
1360
Burgess
....
. . . ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxx
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
C. B.
W.
;
N. S. 45 R. 644
32 L. J. C. P. 189
;
196)347
122 L. T. 224
;
Burne
o.
Burne [1920] P. 17
89 L. J. P. 18
132
Burnet o. Mann (1748) I Ves. Sen. 156 Burnett o. Lynch (1826) 5 B. & C. 589 ; 8 D. & R. 368 4 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. '. 274 Burns v. Bryan or Martin (1887) L. R. iz App. Cas. 184 H. L. (Sc.) Buron v. Denman (1848) 2 Exch. 167 Burr V. Smith [1909] 2 K. B. 306 78 L. J. K. B. 889 ; loi L. T. 194 16 Manson, 210 53 Sol. Jo. 502 25 T. L. R. 542
;
. . .
.......
. .
64
Sol. Jo.
f23 1309
632'
...
.
.
Burrell Burrell
v. o.
Dodd
....
; ;
606, 607
;
13 L. J. Ch. 309
;
7 Jur.
.
587 Burroughes
830
Bayne
(i860)
H.
&
N. 301
29 L. J. Ex. 185
2 L. T. 16
407,
415 Burroughs-Fowler, Re [1916] 2 Ch. 251 ; 85 L. J. Ch. 550; 114 L. T. . 1204 60 Sol. Jo. 1538 H. B. R. 108 32 T. L. R. 493 577 Burrows v. Lang [1901] 2 Ch. 502 70 I.. J. Ch. 607 84 L. T. 623 49 W. R. 710,850 564; 17T. L. R. 514 Burrows v. Rhodes [1899] i Q. B. 816 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 545 80 L. T. 591 48 W. R. 13 ; 63 J. P. 532 324, S42 Burt o. Moore (1793) 5 T. R. 329 2 R. R. 61 1 716 6urton . Henson (1842) 10 M. & W. 105 II L.J. Ex. 348 435
; ; ;
.
Burton v. Hughes (1824) 2 Bing. 173 417 Burton . Knowlton (1796) 3 Ves. 106 1392 ^ . . . Burton v. Le Gros (1864) 34 L. J. Q. B. gi . . . 530 Bushell C.Miller (1718) I Stra. 128. 407 Busher o. Thompson (1846) 4 C. B. 48 ; i Lutw. Reg. Cas. 551 ; 16 L. J. C. P. . . . . . 557,606,765 57; II Jur. 45 ' . Bussey v. Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants & Bell (1908) 24 T. L. R. 437 . 344 Butchero. Butcher (1827) 7 B.&C. 399; I Bos. &P. (N. R.) 1113 ; i V. & B. Ves. 382 ; 12 R. R. 193 ; 14 Beav. 222 ; i M, & Ry. 220 ; 6 L. J. 79 ; 9 (O. S.) K. B. 51 ; 31 R. R. 237 383, 388 Bute (Marquis) v. Thompson {see " Marquis ").
'f
Baker's Case (1591) 2 Ro. Ab. 410 b, p. 3 Butler's 3 Co. 25 ; Moore, 254 ; 3 Leon. 271 Butler, Re [1894] 3 Cb. 250 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 662 ; 43
Butler,
&
And. 348
Poph. 87
97,812,939
W.
;
In
67 L. J. P. 15
1395
1 1
445
Butler .3utler (1890) 63 L. T. 256 Butler V. Knight (1867) L. R. 2 Ex. 109
>
34 J 194
36 L. J. Ex. 66 ; 15 L. T. 621 i ; 407 Butler V. Rice [igio] 2 Ch. 277 79 L. J. Ch. 652 103 L. T. 94 Butler o. Swan Electric Engraving Co. (1906) 22 T. L. R. 275 Butler o. Wearing (1885) 17 Q. B. D; 182 ; 3 Morr. 5 Butlero. Woolcott_(i'8o5)2Bos. &P. (N, R.)64 Butterknowle v. Bishop Auckland [1906] A. C. 305 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 541 ; 94 L. T. 795 ; 70 J. P. 361 22 T. L. R. 516 Butters, Ex parte (1880) 14 Ch. D. 265 43 L. T. 2'; 28 W. R. 876 C. A. Butterworth v. Butterworth [1920] P. 126 ; 89 L. J. P. 151 ; 122 L. T. 804 36 T. L. R. 265 Button, Re [1905] i K. B. 602 74 L. J. K. B. 403 92 L. T. 250 ; 53 W. 437; 12 Mans. Ill
;
W.
R,.
230
553 203 1055 260
....
.
. . .
782 1062
829
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Button, Re [1907] 2 K. B. 180 76 L. 23 T. L. J. K. B. 833 ; 97 L. T. 71 422 ; 14 Manson, 180 C. A Buxton V. Baughan (1834) 6 C. & P. 674 Buxton 11. Lister (1746) 3 Atk. 383 Buxton V. Rust (1872) 41 L. J. Ex." i L. R. 7 Ex. i ; 26 L. T. 502 20 W. 100 affirmed 41 L. J. Ex. 173 L. R. 7 Ex. 279 27 L. T. 210 W. R. 1014 , Byne II. Moore (1813) 5 Taunt. 187; I Marshall, 13
Ixxxf
PAGE
R.
367^ ^2j 964^ 965
125,127
R.
20
loi
'
488
; .
Byng V. Byng (1862) 10 H. L. C. 171, 7L. T. i; 10 W. R. 633 .: Bynoe v. Bank of England [1902] 1 K.
;
31 L. J. Ch. 470
562
B. 467
;
140
50
W.
71 L. J. K. B. 208
86 L, T.
R. 359
490
v.
W.
v.
&
C. 722
33 L. J. Ex. 13
;
9 L. T. 450
12
330
58 Sol. Jo. 340 ; 30 T. L, R. 254 . C. P. 316 ; 5 C. P. D. 344 ; 42 L. T.
1038
89
pi.
.
case of Hundred of (1497) Y. B. 12 Hen. VII., Pasch. Cabell . Vaughan (1669) 7 Wms. Saund. 461 . .
C,
675, 687
.157
Cable 0. Bryant [1908] I Ch. 259 ; 47 L. J. Ch. 78 ; 98 L. T. 98 Cadbury.B. Smith (1869) L. R. 9 Eq. 37 24 L. T. 52 18 W. R. 105 1419, Cadee's and Oliver's Case (1587) 3 Leon. 153 Cadell V. Palmer (1833) i CI. & F. 372 lo Bing. 140 7 Bligh (N. S.) 292 662, 1073, 3 M. & Sc. 57 Cadell V. Wilcocks [1898] P. 21 67 L. J. (P.) 8 ; 78 L. T. 83 46 W. R. 394 14 T. L. R. 100 1247, Cadge, In the Goods of (1868) L. R. 1 P. M. 543 37 L. J. (P.) 15 ; 17 L. T. . 484; 16 W. R. 406 Cadogan v. Lyric Theatre [1894] 3 Ch. 338 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 775 ; 71 L. T. 8 ; 7 R- 594 C. A Cadoval v. Collins (1836) 4 A. & E. 858 Cahill o. Cahill (1883) L. R. 8 App. Cas. 420 49 L. T. 605 ; 31 W. R. 861 Cain V. Moon [1896] 2 Q. B. 283 65 L. J. Q. B. 587 74 L. T. 728 939,
. ; ;
. .
.7"
;
.........
; ;
...
; .
...
; . .
153
1057
39
976
Caine 0. Chapman (1826) 5 A. & E. 647 Caird v. Sime (1887) L. R. 12 App. Cas. 3?6 57 L. J. P, C. 2 36 W. R. 199 H. L. (Sc.) Caldecotto. Smythies (1837) 7 C. & P. 808 Calder v. Dobell (1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 486 40 L. J. C. P. 224 19 W. R. 978 Calderc. Halket (1839) 3 Moo. P. C. 28 Caldwell v. Fellowes (1870) L. R. 9 Eq. 410 39 L. J. Ch. 618 18 W. R. 486 Caledonian Ry. Co. 0. Sprot (1856) 2 Macq. 499 ; 2 Jur. (N. S.)
. ; ; . ; :
'
...
993
57 L. T. 634
....
25 L. T. 129
.
.
.625
;
.
427
62
342
22 L. T. 225
1092
623
W.
-
R.
659
Callisher
v.
713
L. R. 5 Q. B.
449
18
.
R. 1127 Brouncker (1831) 4 C. & P. 518 Calton V. Bragg (1812) 15 East, 223 ; 13 R. R. 451
Callo
V.
.
W.
94
213
.
.
116, 118
i R. R. u8 . Calverley o. Williams (1798) I Ves. jr. 210 Calye's Case (1584) 8 Co. Rep. 32 Camberwell and South London Building Society v. Holloway (1879). 1 3 Ch. 754 49 L. J. Ch. 361 ; 41 L. T, 752 ; 28 W. R. 222 .... Cambridge o, Rous (1802) 8 Ves. 22 6 Rj. R. ?76 ,
. . . . . .
.
37
^
.
244,245
193
1^67
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxxii
TABLE OF CASES
Cameroiio. Reynolds (1^76) Cowp. 403 Cameron & Wells, Re (1887) 37 Ch. D. 32 57 L. J. Ch. 69 36 W. R. 5 Camofs o. Scurr (1840) 9 C. & P. 383 Campanari v. Woodburn (1854) 15 C. B. 400 3 C. L. R. 14
; ;
.......
;
530
104 200
57 L. T. 645
240^ 241 62 L. J. Ch. 594; 68 L. T. 851 3 R. 331 1396 Campbell o. French- (1797) 3 Ves. 321 4R. R.. 5 1250 Campbello. Paddington Borough Council [191 l]i K. B. 869 80 L. J. K. B. 712 739 i4 L- T. 394 75 J- P- ^77 27 T. L. R. 232 9 L. G. R. 387 Campbell v. Sandys (1803) i ScH. & Lef. 281 9 R. R. 33. 571, 580, 581 Campbell v. Spottiswoode (1863) 3 B. & S. 769 32 L. J. Q. B. 185 9 Jur. (N. S.) 1069 i' 8 L. T. 201 II W. R. 569 3 F. & F. 421 509, 526 Campbell Davys v. Lloyd [1901] 2 Ch. 518 '70 L. J. Ch. 714 49 W. R. 710 '' 85 L. T. 59; 17T. L. R. 678 C. A. Canadian Pacific Ry. Co. v. Parke [1899] A. C. 549 (P. C.) 345 Cannon v. Smalley (1885) L. R. 10 P. D. 96 27 Cannon Brewery 0. Nash (1898) 77 L. T. 648 617 .-' Cant .'Gregory (1894)- 10 T. L. R. 584 .. 1291 Canterbury (Corporation) 0. Cooper (1908) 99 L. T. 6iz 552 Capell B. Powell (i8'S4):i7 C. B. N. S. 743 11 L. T. 34 L. J. C. P. 168 421 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 1255 13 W. R. 159. 356, 1196 Capital & Counties Bank 0. Henty (1882) L. R. 7 App. Cas. 741 52 L. J. Q. B. 232; 47L. T:662; 31 W. R. 157; 47J. P. 214 501,508,510Capital & Counties Bank v. Rhodes [1903] i Ch. 631 88 72 L. J. Ch. 336 ". L. T. 255 51 W. R. 470; 19T. L. R. 280 553,809 Cappe?VCase(i868) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 458; 16 W. R. 1002 Cardrosa' Settlement, Re (1878) 7 Ch. D. 728 47 L. J. Ch. 327 38 L. T. 778; 26W. R. 389 899,975 Carlill ti. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [i892]'2 Q. B. 484'; 61 L. J. Q. B. 696 ;
13
;
W. R.^9
; ;
.....
; ;
.
'
24 L.
J. C. P.
.400
.
.
'.
...
. . . . .
.981
91,03,309,312 56J. P.-665. Carhsh o. Salt [1906] i Ch. 335 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 175 94 L. T. 58 54 W. R. 186 244 ''.-'* '.'!. Carlisle (Mayor) v. Graham (1869) L. R. 4- Ex. 361 21 38 L. J. Ex. 226
.
.
...
; ; ;
. -L. T. 133; 18W. R. 318 702,720 Carlton Co. v. Castle Mail Co. [1S98] A. C. 486 67 L. J. Q. B. 795 78 L. T. 66i 112 47 W. R. 65H. L. (E.) Carlyon v. Lovering (1857) i H. & N. 784 ; 26 I.. J. Ex. 251 710 5 W. R. 347 Carmichael, Ex parte [1896] 2 Ch. 643 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 902 240 75 L. T. 45 Carnarvon (Earl) v. Villebois (i844) I3 M. & W. 313 14 L. J. Ex. 233 672 Carpenter v. BuUer (1841) 8 M. & W. 209 10 L. J. Ex. 393 810 Carpenter v. Colins (1605) Yelv. 73 647 Carpenter v. Wall (1840) 11 A. & E. 803 3 Per. & Dav. 457 ; 9 L. J. Q. B 217; 4 Jif; 964 469 Carr v. Fracis Times & Co. [1902] A. C. 176 71 L. J. K. B. 361 50 W. R, 257 339 Carratt v. Motley (I841) i Q. B. 18 I G. & D. 275 10 L. J. Q. B. 259 6 Jur. 259 343 Carrett s. Smallpage (1808) 9 East, 330 686 Carrington . Taylor (1809) II East, 571 2 Camp. 258 480 Carrodus . Sharp (1855) 20 Beav. 56 189 Carrol . Bird (1800) 3 Esp. 201 6 R. R. 824. 209 Carron Iron Co. . Maclaren (1855) 5 H. L. C. 436 8 Carruthers o. Holies (1838) 8A. & ."113 3 N. & P. 246 i W. W. & H. 264 84 Carslake v. Mapledoram (178S) 2 T. R. 473 504, 524
. ;
......
; ; ; ' " ;
.
,
...... ....
; . ;
....
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Carter, i? parte (1773) 2 Amb. 733 Carter's and Kenderdin^'s Contract [1897] i Ch. 776 L. T. 476 ; 45 W. R. 484 : 4 Manson, 34 C. A.
Ixxxiii
PAGE
834
1070 Carter (1857) 3 K. & J. 617 810 v. Crawley (1683) T. Raym. 496 ; Freem. (K. B.) 296 1307, 1308 v. Murcot (1768) 4 Burr. 2162 700 v. Sebright (1859) 26 "eav. 374 28 L. J. Ch. 411; 5 Jur. (N. S.) 259 7 W. R. 225 Carter?/. Wake (1877) 4 Ch. D. 605; 46 L. J. Ch. 841 Cartright's Case (1678) i Freem. (K. B.) 258 1341 Cartwright, Re (1889) 41 Ch. D. 532 ; 58 L. 60 L. T. 891 37 J. Ch. 590 W. R. 612 576, 626 Cartwright v. Cartwright (1793) i Phill. 90 1257 Cartwright v. Green (1803) 8 Ves. 406 921 Caruthers v. Caruthers (1794) 4 Bro. C. C. 500. 1322 Carver . Richards (1859) 27 Beav. 488 i L. T. 257 ; 5 29 L. J. Ch. 169 Jur. (N. S.) 1412; 8 W. R. 157 870 Cary & Lott's Contract, Re [1901] 2 Ch. 463 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 653 84 L. T. 859 17 T. L. R. 598 49 W. R. 581 1269,1372 Cary . Holt (1746) 2 Stra. 1238 11 East, 70 n. 381 Casborne v. Scarfe (1738) i Atk. 603 2 Eq. Co. Ab. 728 818, 827, 1313 ^ Case of Libels (1606) 5 Rep. 125 500, 502 Case of Swans (1592) 7 Rep. 15 b 937 Casey's Patents, Re [1892! i Ch. 104 1020 Cashill V. Wright (1856) 6'E. & B. 891 2 Jur. (N. S.) 1072 4 W. R. 709 245 Cassils V. Holden (1914) 84 L. J. K. B. 834 ; 112 L. T. 373 C. A. 963 Castellain v. Preston (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 380 52 L. J. Q. B. 366 ; 49 L. T.
. . . .
66 L. J. Ch. 408
76
ir.
....
;
'.
.596 .955
44; II W. R. 147 Castle (Henry) & Sons, Re (1906) 94 L. T. 396. Castle V. Sworder (1861) 6 H. & N. 828 ; 30 L. J. Ex. 310 ; 4 L. T. 865 8 Jur. (N. S.) 233 ; 9 W. R. 697 Castle Bytham, Ex parte [1895] i Ch. 348 ; 64 L. J. Ch. 116 ; 71 L. T. 606
......... .....
;
307
961 800
32 L. J. C. P. 79
7 L. T.
922
;
556 Castleden (1861) 9 H. L. C. 186 31 L. J. P. M. & A. 103 5 L. T. 164; 4 Macq. H. L. 159 1177 Catesby's Case (1606) 6 Rep. 61 b 70, 730 Catherwood v. Caslon (1844) 13 M. & W. 261 13 L. J. Ex. 334; 8 Jur. 1167 1076; Car. &M. 431 Cato. Thompson (1882) 9 Q. B. D. 616; 47 L. T. 491 187 Caton V. Caton (1865) L. R. i Ch. App. 137 35 L. J. Ch. 292 14 L. T. 34 ; 12 Jur. 171 (1867) L.^R. 2 H. L. 127 99, loi, 125 .1183 Caton V. Rideout (1849'! i Mac. & G. 599 2 H. & Tw. 33 21 L. T. 188 ; 17 L. R. 4 Ch. 655 Catt c.-Tourle (1869) 38 L. J. Ch. 665 128 W. R. 939 186 Cattel V. Corrall (1840) 4 Y. & Coll. 228 1080 . Cattell, Re [1913] i Ch. 177 ; no L. T. 137 58 Sol. Jo. 67 C. A. Cavalier v. Pope [1905] 2 K. B. 752 74. L. J. K. B. 857 54 W. R. 68 ; 93 L. T. 475 ; 21 T. L. R. 747C. A. [1906] A. C. 428 75 L. J. K. B. Castleden
v.
; ; .
. .
43W.
R. 156; 13 R. 24."
.... ....
;
.
22 T. L. R. 648 H. L 95 L. T. 65 Cawthorn v. Mee (1833) 4 B. & Ad. 617 Central R. C. of Venezuela v. Kisch (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 849 16 L. T. 500 15 W. R. 321 Chadbom B. Green (1839) 9 A. & E. 658 . 609
; ; ; ;
.
329, 397
584
C,
99
36 L.
J.
Ch.
39
617
/2
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxxiv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
v.
Chadwick
Chaffers
v.
782
529
L. T. 24; 42
W.
Chalchman o. Wright (1603) Noy, 118 Chalinder and Herington, Re [1907] i Ch. 58
.......
; ; ; .
.
10 R. 19
63 L.'J. Q. B. 59
70
990
1
76 L. J. Ch. 71 96 L. T. 196 23 T. L. R. 71 Challoner v. Murhall (1795) 2 Ves. Jun. 524 3 R. R. i Chamberlain v. Boyd (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 407 52 L. J. Q. B. 277 ; 48 L. T.' 328; 31 W.R. 572; 47 J- P- 372 Chamberlain v. Hazlewood (1839) 5 ^- & W. 515 3 Jur. 1079 Chamberlayne v. Dummer (1792)^ 3 Bro. C. C. 549 Chambers . Donaldson (1809) 11 East, 65 10 R. R. 435 Champion, Re [1893] i Ch. loi 62 L. J. Ch. 372 67 L. T. 694 2 R. 162 C. A. Champion v. Rigby (1830) i Russ. & M. 539 Tam. 421 9 L. J. (0. S.) Ch. 211 ; 31 R. R. 107. Chancellor, Re (1894) 26 Ch. D. 42 51 L. T. 33 ; 32 53 L. J. Ch. 443 W. R. 465C. Chancellors. Poole (1781) 2 Burr. 764
; . ; .
. . ;
124
606
55'
...
.
Chandelor . Lopus (1603) Cro. Jac. 4 Chandler v. Doulton (1865) 3 H. & C. 553 34 L. J. Ex. 8g ; 11 Jur. (N. S.) z86; II L.T. 639 494,532 Chandler v. Webster [1904] i K. B. 493 73 L. J. K. B. 401 90 L. T. 217 52 W. R. 290 20 T. L. R. 222 C. A 132, 146 Chaplin v. Hicks [191 1] 2 K. B. 786 ; 80 L. J. K. B. 1292 ; 105 L. T. 285 55 Sol. Jo. 580 27 T. L. R. 458 C. A 125 Chaplin & Co., Ltd. v. Westminster Corporation [1901] 2 Ch. 329 ; 70 Ch. 679 L. T. 88 P. 661 ; 49 W. R. 586 L. J. 85 17 T. L. R. 65 J.
;
;
1254
232
1405 632 537
576
'
;
-773
1403
Chapman, Re
67
65
.
JL.
J.
C. A.
?>.
Chapman Allen (1632) Cro. Car. 271 Chapman 0. Franklin (1905) 21 T. L. R. 515 Chapman v. Gibson (1791) 3 Bro. C. C. 230 Chapman o. Hart (1749) I Ves. Sen. 273 Chapman v- Turner (1738-9) 9 Mod. 268 Chapman v. Walton (1833) 10 Bing. 63 3 M. & Scott, 389 2 Chapman 0. Westerby (1914) 58 Sol. Jo. 50 Chappie o. Cooper (1844) 13 M. & W.-252 13 L. J. Ex. 286
; ; ;
;
Charles !). Andrews (1725) 9 Mod. 151 1322 Charlesworth 0. Mills [1892] A. C. 231 ; 61 L. J. Q. B. 830 66 L. T. 690 ; 56 J. P. 628 i 41 W. R. 129 920,921,924,941 Charlton o. Durham (Earl) (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. App. 433 ; 20 L. T. 46'? ; 17 W. R. 995 ; ffl^rming 38 L. J. Ch. 183 . . . 1340 Charriere, Re [1896] i Ch. 912 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 460 ; 74 L. T. 650 44 W. R. ;
. . .
Ch. 892
.
75 L. T. 196
.
. .
45
W. R. .1116,
L. J. C. P. 213
.
539 Charsley
1318, 1325
.
Chase
v.
Westmore
v.
636
;
2 Marsh. 346
17 R. R. 301
224^
964, 965 Richards (1859) 7 H. L. C. 349 29 L. J. Ex. 81 5 Jur. (N. S.) 873 ; 7 W. R. 685 393, ^03 Chatard, Re [1899] i Ch. 712 68 L. J. Ch. 350 80 L. T. 645 47 W. R. 515 1234 Chatterton v. Sec. of State for India [1895] 2 Q. B. 189 64 L. J. Q. B. 676 72.L. T. 858; 59 J..P. 596; 14-R. 504 513 Chaytor, Re [1905] i Ch. 233 74 L. J. Ch. 106 ; 92 L. T. 29a; 53 W. R. 251 11-21
Chasemore
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
.
Ixxxv
PAGE
Chedington's (Rector of) Case (1598) I Rep. 152 b . Cheese 11. Lovejoy (1877) 2 P. D. 251 46 L. J. P. 66; 37 L. T. 294: 25 W. R. 853 C. A ; 1248 Cheeseman v. Exall ^1851) 6 Exch. 341 20 L. J. Ex. 209 957 Cheesman v. Hardman fi8i8) i B. & Aid. 706 19 R. R. 432 Cheatham o. Hampson (1791) 4 T. R. 318 2 R. R. 397 ^ 397, 404 Chenbweth, Re [1902] 2 Ch. 488 71 L. J. Ch. 739 ; 86 L. T. 890 50 W. R. 663; 18T.L. R. 702 1298,1302 Cherry v. Boultbee (1839) 4 My. & Cr. 442 9 L. J. Ch. 118 3 Jur. 1116 affirming 2 Keen, 319 1276 ehesham (Lord), Re (1886) 31 Ch. D. 466 ; 55 L. J. Ch. 401 54 L. T. 154 34 W. R. 321 1279 Chesham's (Lord) Settlement, Re [1909] 2 Ch. 329 78 L. J. Ch. 692 ; loi L. T. 9 25 T. L. R. 657 C. A. 928 Cheshire v. Bailey [1905] i K. B. 237 74 L. J. K. B. 176 53 W. R. 322 3';3 92 L. T. 142: T. L. R. 130 C. A Chesterfield (Earl), Re (1883) 24 Ch. D. 643 52 L. J. Ch. 958 49 L. T, 261 1121 32 W. R. 361 Chesterfield (Lord) o. Harris [1908] 2 Ch. 397 77 L. J. Ch. 688 99 L. T. 558 24 T. L. R. 763 52 Sol. Jo. 639 C. A 677, 716 Chesworth v. Hunt (i88o) 5 C. P. D. 266 ; 49 L. J. C. P. 507 42 L. T. 774 44 J. P. 605; 28 W. R. 815 959 Chetwode o. Crew (1746) Willes, 614 691 Chetwynd's Settlement, Re [1902] i Ch. 692 71 L. J. Ch. 352 86 L. T. 216 18 T. L. R. 348 50 W. R. 361 1109 Chichester 11. Coventry (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 71 36 L. J. Ch. 673 17 L. T. 1284 35; 15 W. R. 849 Chichly's Case (1658) Hardr. 117 717 Child. Affleck (1829) 9 B.&C. 403; 4Man. & Ry. 338 7 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. 272 527 Child V. Hearn (1874) L. R. 9 Ex. 176 783 Child . Hudson's Bay Co. (1723) 2 P. Wms. 207 12 Childers v. Wooler (i860) 2 E. & E. 287 6 Jur. (N. S.) 29 L. J. Q. B. 129 531 444 2 L. T. 49 8 W. R. 321 Chilton V. London Corporation (1878) 7 Ch. D. 735 47 L. J. Ch. 433 ; 38 L. T. 498 ; 26 W. R. 474 715,717 Chinery o. Viall (i860) 5 H. & N. 288 29 L. J. Ex. 180 2 L. T. 466 8 W. R. 629 336, 414 Chinnock v. Marchioness of Ely (1865) 4 De G. J. & S. 638 6 N. R. i ; 12 L. T. 251 II Jur. (N. S. ) 329 13 W. R. 597 91 Chisholm, iic [1901] 2 Ch. 82 70 L. J. Ch. 533 871,906 Chivers v. Savage (1856) 5 E. & B. 697 25 L. J. Q. B. 85 2 Jur. (N. S.) 137 ; 4W. R. 117 439,440 Cholmeley's School tf. Sewell [1894] 2 Q. B. 906 63 L. J. Q. B. 820 71 L. T. 10 R. 368 88 58 J. P. 531 799 662 Cholmley's Case (1597) 2 Rep. 51b Christ Church (Dean of) o. Duke of Buckingham (1864) 17 C. B. N. S. 391 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 749 10 L. T. 575 12 W. R. 986 585 33 L. J. C. P. 322 11 L. J. Ch. 97 828 Christian 0. Field (1842) 2 Hare, 177 5 Jur. 1130 Christie v. Barker (1884) 53 L. J. Q. B. 537 C. A. 6 Jur. Christie o. Borelly (i860) 7 C. B. N. S. 561 29 L. J. C. P. 153 8 W. R. 542 (N. S.) 324 134 62 L. J. Ch. 385 Christie v. Taunton [1893] 2 Ch. 175 3 R. 404 ; 68 L. T. "43 638 41 W. R. 475 17 L. J. Q. B. 109 ; 12 Jur. 374 Christopherson v. Bare (1848) ii Q. B. 473 432
. ;
. . .
.613
.
-675
.....
; ;
. . .
....
.
,~
.738
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxxvi
TABLE OF CASES
i Mac. & G. 460 ; - H. & Tw. 533 ; 19 L. J. Ch. 33 ; 14 Jur. 339 Chudleigh's Case (1589) i Rep. 113 b . . Church o. Cudmore (1691) 2 Lutw. 1181 Churchill, Re (1888) 39 Ch. D. 174 ; 59 L. T. 597 ; 36 W. R. 805 1377, Churchill, Re [1909] 2 Ch. 431 ; loi L. T. 380 ; 53 Sol. Jo. 697 . . Churchill v. I^nt (1819) 2 B. & Aid. 685 ; i Chit. 480 . . . . Churchill o. Siggers (1854) 3 E. & B. 929 ; 2 C. L. R. 1509 23 L. J. Q. B. 308 ;
.
......
. . . . . ;
494 N. 446 ; 26 L. J. Ex. 354 5 W. R. 831 319 Churchward o. .Studdy (181 1) 14 East, 249 iz R. R. 513 932 Churton v. Douglas (1859) Johns. 174 28 L. J. Ch.,841 5 Jur. (N. S.) 887 289, 1029, 1031 7 W. R. 365 Cinque Ports v. R. (1831) 2 Hagg. Adip. 438 702 Citizen's Life Ass. Co. o. Brown [1904] A. Q. 423 90 L. T. 73 L. J. P. C. 102 .11, 346, 494, 520, 521 739 ; 53 W. R. 176 20 T. L. R. 497 City Discount Co. v. M'Lean (1874) 43 L. J. C. P. 344 L. R. 9 C. P. 692 ; 30
&
.....
;
B.
v. Vanacre (1699) 12 Mod. 271 Clache's Case (1572) Dyer, 330 b Clack V. Carlon (1861) 30 L. J. Ch. 639 ; 4 L. T. 361
.114
655
785,790
683, 684
.
R. 568 1 124 HoUarid (1854) ig Beav. 262; 24 L. J. Ch. 13 18 Jur. 1007 2 .' W. R. 402 1403 Claridge v. Mackenzie (1842) 4 M. & Gr^ 142; 4 Scott (N. R.) 796; 11 2D. (N. S.) 898 6 Scott (N. R.) 171 5 Man. & G. 251 L. J. C. P. 72 12 L. J. C. P. 131 390 7 Jur. 329 Clark's (Bridget) Case (1588) 2 Leon. 30 938 Clark V. Chambers (1878) 3 Q. B. D. 327 47 L. J. Q. B. 427 38 L. T. 454 R. 613 26 W. 327, 334, 445 Clark V. Clark (1885) 10 P. D. 188 54 L. J. P. 57 ^2 L. T. 234 ; 49 J. P. ' 1179 516; 33 W. R. 405 Clarke. Danvers (1679) i Ca. Ch. 310 597 Clark V. Hougham (1823) 2 B. & C. 149 : L. 3 D. & R. J. (0. S.) K. B. 249 322 1363 Clark 0. L. G. O. Co. [1906] 2 K. B. 648 75 L. J. K. B. 907 95 L. T. 435 477 Clark V. Molyneux (1877) 3 Q. B. D. 237 ; 47 L. J. Q. B. 230 37 L. T. 694 ; 2^W. R. 104; 14 Cox, C. C. 10 519 Clark V. Newsam (1847) i Exch. 140 16 L. J. Ex. 296 5 Railw.' Cas. 69 336 Clark B. Sewell (1744) 3 Atk. 96 1272 Clark V. Woods (1848) 2 Exch. .395 3 New Sess. Cas. 253 17 L. J. M. C. L. J. Ex. i8g 189; 17 343 Clarke's Settlement, Re[igi6] i Ch. 467 85 L. J. Ch. 592 114 L. T. 501 66i Clarke v. Army & Navy Stores [1903] i K. B. 155 72 L. J. K. B. 153 88 L. T. I ; 19 T. L. R. 80 e. A. Clarke B. Eirley (1889) 41 Ch. D. 422 58 L. J. Ch. 616 60 L. T. 048 ; 37 -. W. R. 746 2gg Clarke 0. Bradlaugh (1881) 8 Q. B. D. 63 51 L. J. Q. B. i 30 W. R. 53 67 Clarke o. Earnshaw (i8i8) Gow, 30 222 Clarke 0. Franklin (1858) 4 K. & J. 257 27 L. J. Ch. 567 6 W. R. 836 1359 Clarke v. Hart (1858) 6 H. L. C. 633 27 L. J. Ch. 615 126 5 Jur. (N. S.) 447 Clarke v. Palmer (1882) 21 Ch. D. 124; 51 L. J. Ch. 634; 48 L. T. 857 761 ' Clarke D. Pennifather (1584) 4 Rep. 23 b 585,586,901 Clarke v. Ramuz [1891] 2 Q. B. 456 60 L. J. Q. B. 679 56 J. P. 5 igg
.
W.
Clack
.......
; ; .
. .
'.
.........
.
'.
-331
.
.......
. ; ; ; ; .
. .
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Clarke v. Shee (1774) 1 Cowp. 197 2 Doug. 698 n Clarke v. Sinaridge (1845) 7 Q- ^- 957 Clarke v. Tipping (1846) 9 Beav. 284 Clavering v. Clavering (1726) 2 P. Wras. 38S Claxton V. Claxton (i6go) 2 Vern. \SiZ Clay and Tetley, Re (1880) 16 Ch. D. 3 50 L. J. Ch. 164
; . .
.
Ixxxvii
PAGE
617, 619
790 668
;
W. R.
Clay
V.
5 C. A
43
40Z; 29
1410
Yates (1856) i H. & N. 73 25 L. J. Ex. 237 2 Jur. (N. S.) 908 4 W. R. 557 Clayards v. Dethick (1848) 12 Q. B. 439 Clayton's Case f J 585) 5 Rep. I ''-'.' If' Clayton's Case (1816) i Mer. 572 15 R. R. i6i 113, II Clayton and Barclay's Contract [1895] i Ch. 214 Clayton 0. Corby (1842) 2 Q. B. 813 2 Gale & Dav. 174 Clayton v. Corby (1843) 5 Q. B. 415 14 L. J. Q. B. 364 ; Dav. & Mer. 449 8 Jur. 212 Clayton v. Le Roy [191 1] 2 K. B. 1031 ; 81 L. J. K. B. 49 104 L. T. 419 75 J. P. 229 27 T. L. R. 206 Clayton v. Williams (1843) 11 M. & W. 803 Cleary v. Booth [1893] 1" Q. B. 465 62 L. J. M. C. 87 68 L. T. 349 ; 41 W. R. 391 51 J. P. 37S 5 R. 263 17 Cox, C. C. 611 437, Cleaver v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association [1892] i Q. B. 147; 61 L. J. Q. B. 128 ; 66 L. T. 220 56 J. P. 180 40 W. R. 230 C: A. Clegg V. Earby Gas Co. [1896] i Q. B. 592 65 L. J. Q. B. 339 ; 44 W. R. 606 Clegg V. Rowland (1866; L. R. 2 Eq.. 160 ; 35 L. J. Ch. 396 14 L. T. 217 14 W. R. 530 Cleland v. Cleland (1913) 109 L. T. 744 30 T. L. R. 20 58 Sol. Jo. 221 Clement v. Cheesman (1884) 27 Ch. D. 631 54 L. J. Ch. 158 ; 33 W. R. 40 Clement o. Chivis (1829) 9 B. & C. 172 4 Man. & Ry. 127; 7 L. J. (O. .S.) K. B. i8q 501 Clements, In the Goods of [1892] P. 254 61 L. J. P. 130 67 L. T. 356 Clements, Re [1894] i Ch. 665 63 L. J. Ch. 326 70 L. T. 682 42 W. R.
; ; ;
321
334 614
1
143
28
855
.......
; ; . ; ; ; ; ;
;
...
1277 328
79
1191
1292
525 1240
"35
v.
;
Flight (1846) 16 M. & W. 42 ; 4 D. & L. 261 i6 L. J. Ex. i j. . 0. L. & N. W. Ry. Co. [1894] 2 Q. B. 482 ; 63 L. J. Q. B. 837 ; 70 L. T. 896; 42 W.R. 338; 58 J. P. 816
422
(1599) 6 Rep. 17 b Clergy (Corporation of) v. Swainson (1747) i Ves. Sen. 75. Cleveland's Settled Estates, Re [1893] 3 Ch. 244 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 955 ; 69 L. T. 735 ; *3 R- 23s n- C'.>K Clifden (Lord), Re [1900] i Ch. 774 Clifford, Re [1912] i Ch. 29 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 220 ; 106 L. T. 14 ; 28 T. L. R.
Clere's (Sir
3 Lev. 395
....... ......
;
1231
866
1419
1357 80
1262 56 Sol. Jo. 91 Watts (1871) 40 L. J. C. P. 36 L. R. 5 C. P. 577 : 22 L. T. 717 18 W. R. 925 95, 129 Clifton 1). Chancellor (i6oo) Moo. 624 947 8 Jur. 958 Clifton V. Hooper (1844) 6 Q. B. 468 14 L. J. Q. B. i 529, 531 102 L. T. 520 ; 79 L. J. K. B. 635 Clissold V. Cratchley [1910] 2 K. B. 244 26 T. L. R. 409 C. 494 8 R. R. 524 n. 963 Close V. Waterhouse (1801) 6 East, 523 n. 1422 Clough V. Bond (1838) 3 My. & Cr. 490 8 L. J. Ch. 51:2 Jur. 958 Clouston V. Corry [1906] A. C. 122 ; 71; L. J. P. C. 20 93 L. T. 706 ; 54 213 W. R. 382 867, 871 103 L. T. 617 Cloutte V. Storey [1911] i Ch. 18 80 L. J. Ch. 193 57
;
Clifford v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
Ixxxviii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Waterworks Co. (1872)
;
Clowes
Staffordshire
;
L. R. 8 Ch.
App. 143
42
375 621
L. J. Ch. 107
27 L. T. 521
21
W.
R. 32
.
Clutterbuck [1913]
t).
W. N.
132
108 L. T.'573
29 T. L. R.
1180 Castaneda [1905] A. C. 6 74 L. J. P. C. i R,. 58 H. L. (Sc.) 138 Coakeri). Willcocks [1911] i K. B. 649 27T. L. R. 137 : 55 103 L. T. 806 1: Sol. Jo. 155; affitmed [igii]zK.'B. 12^; 80 L. J. K. B. 1026 104 L.T. 769 27 f. L. R. 357 714, 783 Coaks V. Boswell (1886) 11 App. Cas. 232 ; 55 L. J. Ch. 761 55 L. T. 32 191
; ; ; ; ; ;
Mills (1691) i Salk. 36 Coatsworth a. Johnson (1886) 54 L. T. 520 ; 55 L. J. Q. B. 220 Cobb 0. Cobb [1900] P. 294:5 69 L. J. P. 125 ; 83 L. T. 716 Cobb . (Stpkes' (18)07) 8 East, 358
.
'
Cobbett V. Brock (1855) 20 Beav. 524 34 Cobbetts. Grey (1850) ig L. J. Ex. 137 4 Exch. 729 431 Cochrane's Case (1840) 8 Dowl. 630 4 Jur. 534 471 Cochrane v. Moore (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 57 59 L. J. Q. B. 377 63 L. T. 153 54 J. P. 804; 38 W.R. 588 939 Cochrane v. Willis (1865) L. R. i Ch. App. 58 13 L. T. 35 L. J. Ch. 36 339; 14W. R. 19 37 .' Cock D. Burrish (1686)1 Vern. 425. 1088 Cockcroft 11. Smith (1705) 2 Salk. 642 6 Mod. 230 Holt, 699 434 Cockerel! v. Cholmeley (1830) i Russ. & M. 419 870 Cocksedge s.. Fanshawe (1779) i Doug. 119 3 Bro. P. C. 703 680, 704 Codrington v. Lindsay (1872) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 578 28 42 L. J. Ch. 526
; ; ; ; ; .
. .
.....
R. 182 Coe o. Clay (1829) 5 Bing. 440 3 M. & P. 57 7 L. J. CO. S.) C P. 162 ; 30 R. R. 699 Coffin V. Coffin (1821) Jac. 70 Cogan V. Stephens (1835) i Beav. 482 n. 5 L. J. Ch. 17 Coggs 0. Bernard (1703) 2 Ld. Raym. 909 ; Comb. 133 ; Salk. 26 Holt, 13 ;
L. T. 177
;
21
W.
1278
611
.....
;
'
792 1358
Sm. L.
:
C.
(nth
,
ed.), p.
.
173
.ft
CoghilLo. Freelove (1691) 3 Mod. 325 1365 Cohen's Executors, Re [1902] i Ch. 187 71 L. J. Ch. 164 . . :332 Cohen v. Bayley-Worthington [1908] A. C. 97 ; 77 L. J. Ch 363 ; 98 L. T. 461 ; 52 Sol. Jo. 238: 568 Cohens'. Huskisson (1837) 2 M. & W. 477 ; Murph. & H. 150 ; 6 L. J. M. C. . 133 437 Cohen v. Mitchell (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 262 ; 59 L. J. Q. B. 409 ; 63 L. T. 206 ; 38W. R. 551 ; 7Morrell, 207C. A. 28,365 Cohen o. Seabrook (1908) 25 T. L. R. 176 452 Colburn . Simms (1843) 2 Ha. 543 ; 12 L. J. Ch. 388 ; 7 Jur. 1104 . . 378 Colchester (Mayor of) v. Brooke (1845) 7 Q. B. 339 ; 15 L. J. Q. B. 173 ; 10
. ;
:
.......
.
.'
'
......
V.
v.
Coldman
v.
Hill [1919]
Sol. Jo. 166; 35 T. L. R. 146 C. A Cole C.Booker (1913) 29 T. L. R. 295 40,499 Cole e.Levingston (1672) I Vent. 224 655 Cole B.iManoing (1877) 2 Q. B. D. 611 ; 46 L. J. M. C. 175 ; 35 L. T. 941 . 1213 Cole 0.. Miles. (1852) 10 Hare, 179 . . . 1349,1407 Cole Bl'Muddle (1854) loHare, 186 ; 22 L.J. Ch. 401 ; 16 Jur. 853 1143
. . . . . .
K. B. 443
400
911
&
.203
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Cole Cole Cole Cole
V.
Ixxxix
N.
W. Bank
(1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 354
733
V. V.
Peyson (1636)
Scott (1849)
I
....
Ch. 63
; ;
44
L. J. C. P. 233
32 L. T,
943 79
;
& Tw.
V.
J.
14 Jur. 25
6
Ir.
Hall
477
Sewell (1843) 4 Dr. & W. i ; 2 Con. & L. 344 affirmed 2 H. L. Cas. 186 ; 12 Jur. 927 Cole V. Turner (1704) 6 Mod. 149 ; Holt, 108 Colebourn's and Mixtone's Case (1588) i Leon. 129
. .
.....
....
.
.
1262
657 432 613 687 1289
T.
Eq. R. 66
Colebrook . Elliott (1766) 3 Burr. 1859 Coleman, Re ([18^6) 4 Ch. D. 165 46 L. J. Ch. 33 Coleman v. Birmingham (1881) 6 Q. B. D. 615 ; 50 L. J. M. C. 92 578; 45 J- P- 521; 29W. R. 715 Coleman v. Bucks, etc.. Bank [1897] 2 Ch. 243 66 L. J. Ch. 564 684; 45W. R. 6i6
. ; . ;
44 L.
76 L. T.
.
Coleman
v.
85 L. J. Ch. 652
115 L. T, 152 Coles V. Sims (1854) i Kay, 56 ; affirmed 6 De G. M. & G. i ; 2 Eq. R. 957 23 L. J. Ch. 258; 18 Jur. 683; 2 W. R. 151 Coles V. Trecothick (1804) 9 Ves. 234 ; i Smith, 233 ; 7 R. R. 167 CoUard o. Marshall [1892] i Ch. 571 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 268 ; 66 L. T. 248 ; 40
....
;
W.
Collen
V.
R. 473
;
Wright ^1857) 8 El. & Bl. 647 27 L. J. Q. B. 215 4 Jur. (N. S 61 357; 6 W. R. 123 Colleton V. Garth (1833) 6 Sim. 19 2 L. J. Ch. 75 1264 CoUett V. Curling (1847) 10 Q. B. 785 16 L. J. Q. B. 390 ; 11 Jur. 890 622 CoUingwood . Pace (1661) i Levinz, 59 31 Collins, Re (1886) 32 Ch. D. 229 55 L. J. Ch. 672 55 L. T. 21 ; 50 J. P, 821 34 W. R. 650 "35 Collins V. Benison (1754) Sayer, 138 436 i Sm. L. C. (nth ed.) 369. Collins o. Blantern (1767)2 Wils. 341 4', 95) 96. '39 Collins V. Collins(i833) 2 My. & K. 703 1121 Collins V. Cooper (1893) 17 Cox, C. C. 647 693 Collins V. Evans (1844) 5 Q. B. 820 324 Collinson 0. Lister (1855) 20 Beav. 356 1405 Ch. 484 ; 90 Colls V. Home and Colonial Stores [1904] A. C. 179 ; 73 L. J. 20 t. R. 475-H. L. L. T. 687 327, 375, 393, 403, 53 W. R. 30
;
.
711,712
CoUyer
v.
51 L. J. Ch. 14
:
45 L. T. 567
30
W. R. 70
940
60 L. J. Ch. 131 ; 63 Colonial Bank v. Cady (1890) L. R. 15 App. Cas. 267 1005 L. T. 27; 39 W. R. 17 Colonial Bank v. Whinney (1886) L. R. 11 App. Cas. 426 56 L. J. Ch. 43 ; 982, 983 5; L. T. 362 ; 34 W. R. 705 ; 3 Morrell, 207 Colthirst V. Byushin (1550) i Plowd. 21 . 654 Colwell 0. St. Pancras [1904] i Ch. 707 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 271; ; 68 J P. 286 ; 52 401 W. R. 523 ; 90 L. T. 153 ; 20 T. L. R. 236 412 Colwill o. Reeves (i8ii) 2 Campb. 575 1410 Colyer v. Finch (1856) 5 H. L. C. 905 ; 26 L. J. Ch. 65 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 25
...
.
. .
Pitt (1763) 3 Burr. 1423 Comber's Case (1721) i P. Wms. 766 Comber o. Anderson (1808) i Camp. 523.
v.
Combe
....
.
230 99
1346, 1347
230
;
Comfort
64
L.
T. 68s
55
1047
Digitized
by Microsoft
xc
TABLE OF CASES
Bowring-Hanhury. [1905] A. C. 84 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 263 ; 92 L. T. . . . . 53 W. R. 402 i 21 T. L. R. 252 20 Eq. 11 ; 32 L. T. 420 ; 0. Scott (1875)44 L. J. Ch. 563 ; L. R.
v.
. .
Comiskey
241 23
;
1099
loi
Commins
Commrs.
268
W.
of
R. 498
.,
.'
Stamps
. .
v.
Hope
:
[1891] A. C. 476
.
'
60 L. J. P. C. 44
65 L. T.
-152
230
Co.
v.
Weber, Lohmann
;
74 L. J. P. C. 25
21 T. L. R. 149
91 L. T. 813
v.
53
W.
&
Cdmpanhia de Mozambique
British South, Africa Co. [1892] 2 Q. B. 358 ; [1893] A. C. 602 ; 63 L. J. Q. B. 70 ; 6 R. I ; 69 L. T. 664H- L. (E.). Compania Naviera v. Churchill [1906] i K. B. 237 ; 75 L. J. K. B. 94 ; 94 L. T. 59 ; 54 W. R. 406 ; 22 T. L. R. 85 ; 11 Com. Cas, 49 ; 10 Asp.
:
339
M. L.
1094
;
C.
177
L.:
944
z
Compania Sansinena
103
o.
T. 333
K. B. 54
79 L.
J.
K. B.
337
A.
.
C. A.
;
54L.
J.
C.
1380,
1381,1382
Compton Compton
. . . Ch. 313 . 49 o. Bloxham (1845) 2 Coll. 201 ; 14 L. . 1285 J. Ch. 380 ; 9 Jur. 935 Conolly, i?e [1910] i Ch. 219 . . . . . . 1099 Conron o. Conron (1858) 7 H. L. C. 168 1265 Consolidated Co. v. Curtis [1892] i Q. B. 495 ; 61 L. J. Q. B. 325 ; 40 W. R. u 426 ; 56 J. P. 565 62,415,417,419 Constable's Case (1601) 5 Rep. 106 . .684,699,700,702 Constable 0. Nicholson (1863) 14 C. B. N. S. 230 ; 32 L. J. C. P. 240 11
V.
Bagley [1892]
..:.... ...
. .
'.
718, 849 Constantinidi v. Constantinidi [1903] P. 246 ; 72 L. J. P. 82 ; 89 L. T. 340 ; 52W. R. 190; 19T. L. R. 699 1191 Continental Oxygen Co., Re [1897] i Ch. 511 : 66 L. J. Ch. 273 ; 76 L. T. . . loii 229; 45 W. R. 313 Conway 0. Wade [1909] A. C. 506 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 1025 ; loi L. T. 248 j 53 Sol. Jo. 754 ; 25 T. L. R. 779 478, 479, 480, 485 . Cook V. Arundel (Earl) (1646) Hardres, 87 . . . . 804 o. Dan vers (1806) 7 East, 299 Cook 607 Cook V. Duckenfield (1743) I Atk. 562 874 Cook V. Gregson (1856) 3 Drew. 547 ; 25 L. J. Ch. 706 ; 2 Jur (N. S.) 510 R. 581 1370, 1371 Cook V. Martyn (1737) 2 Atk. 2 1419 Cook V. Ward (1830) 6 Bing. 409 ; 4 Moo. & P. 99 ; 8 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 126 01, 525 Cook V. Wright (1861) i B. & S. 559 ; 30 L. J. Q. B. 321 ; 4 L. T. 704 94 Cooke's Case (i'^8i) Moo. 178 79 Cooke, iJ [1913] 2 Ch. 661 ; 58 Sol. Jo, 67 1412 Cooke B. Birt (1814) 5 Taunt. 764 ; i Marsh. 333 ; 15 R. R. 652 385, 971 Cooke , BxogdeM (1885) I T. L. Ri 497 370 Cooke V. Chilcott (1876) 3 Ch. D. 694 ; 34 L. T. 207 803 Cooke V. Collingridge (1823) Jac. 607 ; i L. J. (0. S.) Ch. 74 ; 23 R. R. 155 1411 Cooke 11. Cooke (1863) 3 Sw. & Tr. 246 "95 Cooke t'. Eshelby (1887) 12 App. Ca. 271 ; 56 L. J. Q. B. 505 ; 56 L. T. 673
".
W.
R. 698
....
......
4W.
'.
'
...
;
;
35
W.
V.
o.
;
76
11.
R. 629 Forbes (1867) L. R. 5 Eq. 172 37 L. M. &c. Ry. of Ireland [1909] A. C. 229 100 L. ,T. 626 25 T. L. Ri 375 Oxley (1790) 3 T. R. 653
; ;
.
65
J. Ch. 178
;
Tr.
17 L. T. 371 R. 499 78 L. J. P.
374
C,
334
92
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Cooke
I
XCl
i C.
L. R. looo
24.
L.
T.
Q. B. 167
Re [1920] 2 Ch. 536 64 Sol. Jo. 739 Coomber v. Howard (1845) i C. B. 440
Coole,
36 T. L.
736
Coope V. Cresswell (1866) L. R. 2 Ch. App. 112 36 L. J. Ch. 114; 15 L. T. 42; 15 W. R. 242 "384, 1385 Cooper V. Barton (1810) 3 Camp. 5 n. 13 R. R. 736 n. ig6 Cooper V. Bocket (1843) 3 Curt. 648 ; (1846) 4 Moo. P C. 419 10 Jur.
; ; ;
931
1238, 12.13
Burr. 20, 31 ; i W. Bl. 65 409,414,415 Cooper (1870) I,. R. 6 Ch. App. 15 ; 40 L. J. Ch. 5 ; 23 L. T. 488 ; 19 W. R. 85 ; (1874) L. R. 7 H. L. 53 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 6 30 L. T. 409 ; 22 W. R. 713 . 1278, 1296, 1312 Cooper V. Cooper (1873) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 813 ; 43 L. J. Ch. 158; 29 L. T. 321 1284 Cooper V. Crane [1891] P. 369 ; 40 W. R. 127 1 175 Cooper V. France (1850) 19 L. J. Ch. 313 ; 14 Jur. 214 1096 Cooper V. Jarman (i860) L. R. 3 Eq. 98 ; 36 L. J. Ch. 85 2 Jur. (N. S.; 956; 15 W. R. 142 1395 Cooper V. Macdonald (1873) L. R. 16 Eq. 258 ; 42 L. J. Ch. 533 ; 28 L. T. 693 1283 Cooper t>. Macdonald (1877) 7 Ch. D. 288 47 L. J. Ch. 373 38 L. T. 191 26 W. R. 377 C. 4, 1315 Cooper V. Marshall (1757) i Burr. 259 ; 2 Ken. 1 ; 2 Wills 398 Cooper 11. Phibbs (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. C. 149; 16 L. T.'678; 15 W. R, i49 37
V.
Cooper Cooper
Chitty (1756)
V.
V.
V. V.
(i 831) 4 C. & P. 581 . Reilly (1829) 2 Sim. 560 ; i Russ, & M. 560 Shepherd (1846) 3 C. B. 266 ; 4 D. & L. 214
Phillips
208
;
10 Jur. 758
....
; ;
5 L. J. C. P.
237
421 1233
Cooper V. Thornton (1790) 3 Bro. C. C. 96 Cooper V. Willomatt (1845) i C. B. 672 14 L J. C. P. 219 9 Jur. 598 Cooper V. Woolfitt (1857) 2 H. & N. 122 26 L. jrEx. 310 3jur.(N.S.)S .Ex.310; 3 Ju'r."(N. S.) 870 5 W. R. 790 Coote V. Lighworth (1596) F. Moore 457 Coote V. Whittington (1873) L. R. 16 Eq. 534 42 L. J. Ch. 846 29 L. T 206 21 W. R. 837 Cope V. Burt (1809) i Hagg. Con. 434 Cope V. Sharpe [1912] 1 K. B. 496 81 L. J. K. B. 346 186 L. T. 56; 56
; ; ;
420
1356
343
..
1344 1 170
Sol. Jo.
187
28 T. L. R.
2
.
Copeland,
121
;
Fx parte (1852) W. R. 9
I
386, 723
;
22 L.
J.
Bky. 17
17 Jur..,,
.
1003
77 L. J. Ch. 610 99 L. T. 371 24 T. L. R. 628 52 Sol. Jo. 516 C. A. 606, 752 Copis V. Middleton (1818) 2 Madd. 410 1064 17 R. R. 226 1284 Copley V. Copley (171 1) i P. Wms. 147 614 Copper Mining Co. v. Beach (1823) 13 Beav. 478 1 190 Copsey V. Copsey [1905] P. 94 74 L. J. P. 40 Corbet's (Sir Miles) Case (1585) 7 Rep. 5 a ^; Corbet's Case (1599) i Rep. 84, 87 560, 564 Corbet b. Corbet (1824) i Sim. & St. 612 2 L, J. (0. S.) Ch. 108 affirmed, 1322 7 L. J. (O. S.) Ch. 9 5 Russ. 254 654 Corbet v. Stone (1653) Ld. Raym. 151 i Corbett . Brown (1831) 8 Bing. 35 ; i Moo. & Sc. 85 ; 5 C. & P. 363 Mood. & R. 108; I L. J. C. P. 13 541
v.
; I
Copestake
Hoper
;
[1908] 2 Ch. 10
Digitized
by Microsoft
xcu
Corbett
Corbett 32
TABLE OF CASES
v.
Corbett (1889) 14 P. D. 7
114 C.
v.
58 L. J. P. 17
;
60 L. T. 74
:
'
37
W. R.
43*558,931
;
54 L. J. Ch. 109
J. C.
50 L. T. 740
. .
W.
-754
S.)
Corby
11.
Hill (1858)
C. B.
N.
S.
221
27 L.
;
P. 318
4 Jur. (N.
;
512; 6
826
Corelli 0.
W.
.
R. 575
332 44 L.
J.
Cordwell's Estate,
Re
Ch. 746
23
W.
R.
1311
500.
Wall (1906) 22 T. L. R. 532 Cork 1). Baker (1716) i Stra. 34 Cork & Bandon Ry. Co. v. Goode (1853) 13 C. B. 826 22 L. J. C. P. 198 17 Jur. 555 V I W. R. 410 Cornfoot v. Fowke (1840) 6 M. & W. 358 9 L. J. Ex. 297 ; 4 Jur. 919
; . . . . . . . ;
........
. .
98
989
543 Carlton Bank [1900] i Q. B. 22 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 1020 ; 81 L. T. 11, 346, 494 415 ; 16 T. L. R. 12 C. A. Cornish v. Caway (1648) Aleyn, 75 614 Cornish v. Clark (1872) L. R. 14 Eq. 184; 42 L. J. Ch. 14; 26 L. T. 494; 1061 20 W. R. 897 Cornwall (Solicitor to Duchy of) v. Canning (1880) 5 P. D. 1 14 ; 41 L. T. 737 ;
Cornford
v.
....... ..........
28W.
Cornwall
R. 278
1338
v.
Henson
69 L. J. Ch. 581
82 L. T. 735
;
49 W. R. 42 C. A. Cornwell v. Metropolitan Commissioners (1855) 10 Exch. 771 3 C. L. R. 417 774 Corpe i>. Overton (1833) 10 Bing. 252 3 M. & Sc. 738 3 L. J. C. P. 24 .23, 267 Corsellis, Re (1887) 34 Ch. D. 675 56 L. J. Ch. 294 56 L. T. 411 51 J. P. 1 124 597 35 W. R. 309 C. A Cort V. Birkbeck (1779) i Doug. 218 747 Corveu's Case (n. d.) 12 Rep. 105 934 Coryton v. Lithebye (1670) 2 Wms. Saund. (ed. 1845) "7 349 Costara's and Wingfield's Case (1588) 2 Leon. 44 849 Costigan o. Hastier (1804) 2 Sch. & Lef. 165 188 Cotgrave, Re [1903] 2 Ch. 705 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 777 ; 89 L. T. 433 52 W. R. . 411; 10 Mass. 377 577 6'27 Cottee V. Richardson (1851) 7 Exch. 143 ; 21 L. J. Ex. 52 . Cotter 0. Layer (1731) 2 P. Wms. 623 870 Cotterell v. Jones (i8;i) 11 C. B. 713 21 L. J. C. P. 2 16 Jur. 88 495 Couch . Stratton (1799) 4 Ves. 391 1325 Coughlin 0. Gillison [1899] i Q. B. 145 68 L. J. Q. B. 147 79 L. J. 627 ; 47 W. R. 113 C. A. 198,35s Couldery v. Bartrum (1881) 19 Ch. D. 394 51 L. J. Ch. 265 45 L. T. 689 30 W. R. 141 -C. A 1388 Coulson o. Davidson (1907) 96 L. T. 20 71 J. P. 17 5 L. G. R. 56 121 Coulson's Trusts, iifi (1908) 97 L. T. 754 1079,1104 Coulter's Case (1599) 5 Rep. 30 b 1345, 1379 Coulthart v. Clementson (1879) 5 Q. B. D. 42 ; 49 L. J. Q. B. 204 41 L. T. 300 798 28 W. R. 355 Court V. Buckland (1876) i Ch. D. 605 1358 Courtenay v. Williams (1844) 3 Ha. 539; 13 L. J. Ch. 461 affirmed 15 1276 ^ L. J. Ch. 204 ; 8 Jur. 844 Courtier, Re (1886)34 Ch. D. 136 56 L. J. Ch. 350 ; 55 L. T. 574 ; 51 J. P. IU9 117; 35 W. R. 85C. A Couturier D. Hastie (1852) 8 Exch. 40 22 L. J. Ex. 97 (1856) 5 H. L. C.
; ; ; ; ; ; .
.126
.....
;
.
........
; ; ; "
673
Covell,
-37,236
;
In
the
Goods of (liSg) 15 P. D. 8
59 L. J. P. 7
61 L. T. 620
38
W.
R. 79
1350
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Laming (1808) i Carapb. 497 Cowan's Estate, Re (1880) 14 Ch. D. 638
Covell
V.
xciii
.......
;
PAGE
407
1055
49 L.
;
28W.
Cowan
Coward
V.
;
J.
Ch. 402
42 L. T. 866
;
R. 827
57 L. J. Q. B. 401
;
58 L. T.
9,
857
W.
R. 895
Baddeley (1859) 4 H. & N. 478 ; 28 L. J. Ex. 260 5 Jur. (N. S.) 414 7 W. R. 466 432 Cowell . Simpson (1809) 16 yes. 275 961,962,968 Cowen V. Simpson (1795) i Esp. 290 539 Cowes V. Southampton, &c. [1905] z K. B.'287 74 L. J. K. B. 665 92 L. T. 658; 69 J. P. 298; 53 W. R. 602; 21 T. L. R. 506; 3 L. G. R. 807 695, 696 Cowley V. Newmarket Local Board [1892! A. C. ^45 i R. 45 62 L. J. Q. B. L. (Ei) 67 L. T. 486 56 J. P. 805 65 404 Cowley V. Wellesley (1866) L. R. Eq. 656 35 Beav. 635 ; 14 L. T. 425 14 W. R. 528 596, 790 Cowling . Higginson (1838) 4 M. & W. 245 707
v.
;
..... .......
; ; ; ; ;
Cowper V. Laidler [1903] 2 Ch. 337 72 L. J. Ch. 578 Cowper o. Scott (1731) 3 P. Wms. 119 Cox V. Burbidge (1863) 13 C. B. N. S. 430 32 L. J. C.
; ;
970;
II
W.
R. 435
;
Cox V. Cooper (1863) 9 L. T. 329 Cox V. Cox (1826) % Add. 276 Cox V. Cox & Wardc [1906] P. 267
557
51
W.
;
R. 539.
373, 378
1310
P. 89
.
12
W.
R. 75
508 1201
1203
75 L. J. P. 75
;
95 L. T. 546
J. P. C.
22 T. L. R.
V.
English, etc.
Bank
[1905] A. C. 168
74 L.
62
92 L. T.
371, (i860) 8 H. L. C. 268 ; 9 C. B. N. S. 47 ; 30 L. J. C. P. 125 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 105 ; 8 W. R. 754 V. Higford (1710) 2 Vern. 664 592, 21 L.T. 178 . 0. Lee (1869) L. R. 4 Ex. 284; 38 L. . J. Ex. 219; V. Mathews (1861) 2 F. & F. 397 V. Middleton (1854) 2 Drew. 209 ; 2 Eq. R. 631 ; 23 L. J. Ch. 618 ; 2 W. R. 284
483-P- C V. Hickman
487
262
594 525 219
187
.
....... .......
'
Cox V. Muncey (1859) 6 C. B. N. S. 375 Cox and Neve, Re [1891] 2 Ch. 109 64 L. T. 733 39 W. R. 412 Cox Moore v. Peruvian Corporation [1908] i Ch. 604 77 L. J. Ch. 387
.
L. T. 611 ; 15 Mans. 191 . Crace, In re [1902] i Ch. 733 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 358 ; 86 L. T. 144 . Cracknell v. Janson (1879) i"i Ch. D. i ; 48 L. J. Ch. 168 ; 40 L. T. 640 ; 27 W. R.-85I Cradock v. Piper (1850) i Mac. & G. 664 ; i Hall & Tw. 617 ; 19 L. J. Ch.
.
........
;
;
476 759
1009
98
293
959
1
107; 14 Jur. 97
Craig Craig
V.
Dowding
B.
C. A. . (1908) q8 L. T. 231 ; 24 T. L. R. 248 Hasell (1843) 4 Q. B. 481 ; 3 Gal. & D. 299 ; 12 L. J. Q. B. 181
. . . .
125
7 Jur. 368
S.
313
; .
33 L. J. Q, B. 224
10 L. T.
.
Cranky
v.
946
105
Cranston,
Re
Crawford v. W. R. 484C.
Crawley,
1064
;
60 L. J. Ch. 683
;
65L.T. 32;
;
39
.
A
;
1136
Re
54 L. J. Ch. 652
52 L. T. 460
49
J. P.
.
II20
Digitized
by Microsoft
xciv
TABLE OF CASES
w.
(1S20) 4 B. & Aid. 52 Creaton v. Creaton (185.6) 26 L. J. Ch. 266 ; 3 Sm. & G. 386 ; z Jur. (N. 1223 ; 5 W. R. 123 Creen v. Wright (1876) 1 C. P. D. 591 ; 35 L. T. 339 . . Cresswell, Re (1881) 45 L. T. 468 ; 30 W. R. 244 Cresswell v. Cresssypll (1869) L. R. 6'Eq. 69 37 L. J. Ch. 521 ; 18 L. 392 ; 16 W. R. 699 Cresswell o. Hawkins (1857) 3 Jur. (N. S.) 407. . Cribb V. Kynoch, Ltd. (No. 2) [1908] 2 K. B. 558 ; 77 L. J. K. B. looi ; L. T. 216; 24T. L. R. 736 Crichtoji 0. .Crichton [1895] 2 Ch. 853 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 13 73 L. T. 556 ; 13 R. 77Q J. P. 792 ; 44 W. R. 203 Crickett . Dolby (1795) 3 Ves. 10
Crawshay
Homfray
......
S.)
.
. . .
PAGE
962 659 212 1234
1259
T.
...
;
581,589
99
452
59
.
Crickmore
Freeston (1870) 40 L. J. Ch. 137 C. A 959 Re [1906] i Ch. 523 75 L. J. Ch. 307 94 L. T. 471 1012 54W. R. 298; 13 Mans. 181 Crippen, In the Estate of [191 1] P. 108 80 L: J. P. 47 104 L. T. 224 27 T. L. R. 258 ; 55 Sol. Jo. 273 . 1277 Crisp V. Thomas (1890) d-i, L. T. 756 C. A. 330 55 J. P. 261 Crocker v. Waine (1854) 5 B. & S. 697 33 L. J. Q. B. 316 ; 10 L. T. 600 " 12 W. R. 905 571 Croft 1). Blay [1919] 2 Ch. 343 ; 85 L. J. Ch. 545 ; 121 L. T. 18 ; 63 Sol. Jo. 607 ; 35 T. L. R. 556 C. \ 619 Croft li. Stevens (1862) 7 H. & N. 570 10 31 L. J. Ex. 143 5 LrT. 683 W. R. 272 528 Crompton v. Jarratt (1885) 30 Ch. D. 298 54 L. J. Ch. 1019 53 L. T. 603 ' 33 W. R. 913 725 Crompton v. 'Lea. (1874) L. R. 19 Eq. 115 44 L. J. Ch. 69 31 L. T. 469 ; 23 W. R. S3 783 Cronmire, In re [1898] 2 Q. B. 383 67 L. J. Q. B. 620 78 L. T. 483 ; 46 W. R. 679 ; 5 Manson, 30 310 Crooke B. Watt (1690) 2 Vern. 124. 1309 Cropp . Tilney (1693) 3 Salk. 225 Holt, 422. Crosby v. Wadsworth (1805) 6 East, 602 ; 2 Smith, 559 8 R. R. 556 381, 715 Cross, Re (1882) 'za Ch. D. 109 51 L. J. Ch. 645 ; 45 L. T. 777 ; 30 W. R. 376 C. A 84s Cross V. Gardner (1689) Carth. 90 i Show. 68 3 Mod. 261 ; Comb. 142 ;
v.
1282 1271
:
'
.......
; ; . . . .
. .
.501
537
;
.
26 T. L. R. 171
.
;
.
54
.
Sol. Jo.
. .
1112
Crosskey
0.
Mills (1834)
C.
M. & R. 298
3 L. J.
Crossley Bros. v. Lee [1908] i K. B. 86 ; 77 L. J. 97 L. T. 850 ; ; 24 T. L. R. 35 972 Crossley v. Elworthy (1871) L. R. 12 Eq. 158 ; 40 L. J. Ch. 480 ; 24 L. T. 1063 607 ; 19 W. R. 842 Crossley v. Lightowler (1867) L. R. 2 Ch. App. 478 ; 36 L. J. Ch. 584 ; 16 L. T. 438 ; 15 W. R. 801 . . . . 848, 852 Crouch V. .Credit Foncier (1873) 42 L. J. Q. B. 183 ; L. R. 8 Q. B. 374 ; 29 L. T. 259 ; 21 W. R. 946 142 Crouch o. G. W. Ry. Co. (1858) 3 H. & N. 183 251 Crouch V. L. & N. W. Ry. Co. (1854) 14 C. B. 255 ; 2 C. L. R. 188 ; 23 L. J. C. P. 73; 18 Jur. 148; 2 W. R. 166 260 Crouch 0. Martin (1707) 2 Vern. 595 141, 985
. . .
.421
Crowder Crowder
......
.
. . .
o. v.
605
13 R. R.
267
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Crowhurst
v.
xcv
PAGE
48 L.
Amersham
.' ' .* .' ^' 39L.T.355;27W.R.95 Crowhurstw. Laverack(i852)gEx. 2oSi 22L. J. Ex. <;7; I W. R. 56. Crowther, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 56 64 L. J. Ch. 537 72 L. T. 762 43 W. R. 571 ; 13 R. 496 Croxon, Re [1904] i Ch. 252 73 L. J. Ch. 170 89 L. T. 733 52 W. R.
.
. .
"
5
;
I.
Ex. loq
.
406
95
,405
343
Cruise
0.
. . . .
48
; ;
Burke [1919] 2 Ir. R. (K. B.) 182 ,. .491 Crumble v. Wallsend Local Board [1891] i Q. B. 503 60 L. J. Q. B. 392 64 L. T. 490 ; 55 J. P. 421 C. A 373 Crump, / iiie Gooiii 0/(1820) 3 Phill. 497 1331 Crump V. Lambert (1867) L. R. 3 Eq. 413 15 L. T. 600 15 W. R. 417
; ;
17 L133 394 Crurape v. Crumpe [1900] A. C. 127 69 L. J. P. C. 7 82 L. T. 130 556 Cruse V. Paine (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 641 37 L. J. Ch. 711 19 L. T. 127 ; 17 W. R. 44 Crutchley, i?e[i9i2] 2Ch. 335 81 L. J. Ch. 644; 107L. T. 194. 559 Cruttwell t'. Lye (1810) 17 Ves. 335 1630,1031 Cubitt V. Porter (1828) 8 B. & C. 257 2 Man. & Ry. 267 6 L. J. O. S. K. B. 306 780 Cuckson V. Stones (1859) ' ^1. & El. 248 28 L. J. Q. B. 25 5 Jur. (N. S.) 337; 7 W. R. 134 213 Cuenod v. Leslie [1909] i K. B. 880 78 L. J. K. B. 695 100 L. T. 675 25 T. I,. R. 374 53 Sol. Jo. 340 C. A 58, 1 197 Cuffe, Re [1908] 2 Ch. 500 77 L. J. Ch. 776 99 L. T. 267 52 Sol. Jo. 661 24T. L. R. 781 1317 Cullen v. Knowles [1898] 2 Q. B. 380 67 L. J. Q. B. 821 157 Culley V. Charman (1881) 7 Q. B. D. 89 50 L. J. M. C. iii 45 L. T. 28; 1 181 45 J. P. 768 ; 29 W. R. 803 Cumber o. Ep. Chichester (1608) Cro. Jac. 216. 731 Cumber o. Wane (1718) I Str. 426 151 Cuming . Hill (1819) 3 B. & Aid. 59 217 Cummins v. Fletcher (1879) 14 Ch. D. 699 49 L. J. Ch. 563 42 L. T. 859 28 W. R. 772 Cundiff V. Fitz-simmons [1911] : K. B. 513 ; 80 L. J. K. B. 422 ; 103 L. T. 811 738 Cundy n. Lindsay (1878) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 459 ; 47 L. J. Q. B. 481 38 L. T. 573 ; 26 W. R. 406 37 Cunningham v. Dunn (1878) 48 L. J. C. P. 62 ; 3 C. P. D. 443 38 L. T. 631C. A. 129 M'Cle. 495 Cupitc. Jackson (1824) 13 Price, 721 28 R. R. 735 739,837 Curl Bros. v. Webster [1904] i Ch..685 90 L. T. 479 73 L. J. Ch. 540 52 W. R. 413 289, 1031 ^ Currie zi. Misa (1875) L. R. 10 Ex. 153 93 Curteis v. Wormald (1878) 10 Ch. D. 172 : 40 L. T. 108 i3<;8, 1359 27 W. R. 419 Curtis' Case (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 455 ; 37' L. J. Ch. 629 981 100 L. T. 977 , Curtis V. Black & Co. [1909] 2 K. B. 529 78 L. J. K. B. 1022 458 53 Sol. Jo. 576 25 T. L. R. 621 1410 Curtis v. Fulbrook (1849) 8 Ha. 25, 278 19 L. J. Ch. 65 13 Jur. 1044 1218 Curtis o. Rippon (1819) 4 Madd. 462 Curwen v. Salkeld (1803) 3 East, 538 683, 692, 693 1212 Custodes o. Ginkes (1651) Style, 283 1405 Cutbush V. Cutbush (1839) ' Beav. 184 8 L. J. Ch. 175 3 Jur. 142. 132) 214 Cutter o. Powell (1795) 6 T. R. 320; 3 R. R. 185 1252 Cutto V. Gilbert (1854) 9 Moo. P. C. 131
; ;
.
T.
......
; ; ; ; ; ;
.295
...
.
.
..... .......
; ; ; ; .
. .
.833
.
'.
....
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
xcvi
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Da
Costaj
Re
240
81 L. J. Ch. 293
106 L. T. 458
.
56 Sol. Jo.
.
Costa v. Davis (1798) i Bos. & P. 242 4 R. R. 795 Dacre, Re [1916] i Ch. 344; 85 L. J. Ch. 274; 114 L. T. 387; 60
Da
Sol. Jo.
1311 Patrickson (i860) i Dr. & Sm. 182 29 L. J. Ch. 846 ; 6 Jur. (N. S.) i394 863;8W. R. 597 Dadswell v. Jacobs (i887),34 Ch. D. 278 56 L. J. Ch. 233 55 L. T. 857 " 233 35 W. R. 261 Dagenham Dock Co., Re (1873) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 1022 43 L. J. Ch. 261 21 W. R. 898 50 Daimler Co. v. Continental Co. [1916] 2 A. C. 307 85 L. J. K. B. 1333 114 31B L. T. 1049 60 Sol. Jo. 602 32 T. L. R. 624H. L. (E.) 8, Daintree v. Butcher (1888) 13 P. D. 102 57 L. J. P. 76 58 L. T.-661 C. A. 1238 Affirming 52 J. P. 87 Dakhyl v. Labouchere [1908] 2 K. B. 325 n. 77 L. J. K. B. 728 96 L. T. 508, 509, 526 399 23 T. L. R. 364 Dakin & Co. v. Lee [1916] i K. B. 566 84 L. J. K. B. 2031 113 L. T. 903 105 59 Sol. Jo. 650 C. A Dalby v. India & London Life Assurance Co. (1854) 15 C. B. 365 3 C. L. R. 61 24 L. J; C. P. 2 18 Jur. 1024 3 W. R. 116 304, 306 Dale -0. Hamilton (1846) 5 Hare, 369; 16 L. J. Ch. 126; 11 Jur. 163; 2 Ph. 266 99, 267 Dale o. SoUet (1767) 4 Burr. 2133 234 Dallas, Re [1904] 2 Ch. 385 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 365 90 L. T, 177 52 W. R. 567
305 C. A
v.
Dacre
........
; ; ; ; ;
.
C. A
Dalrymple . Dalrymple (1811) 2 Hagg. Con. 54 Dalton o. Angus (1877) 3 Q- B. D. 85 (1878) 4 Q. B. D. 162 6 App. Ca. 740 50 L. J. Q. B. 689 44 L. T. 844 ; 46
:
.....
.
1052,1153
1167
W.
R. 191
.
Dalton V. Barnard (1618) Cro. Jac. 520 699 D'Alton. D'Alton (i878)4P. D. 87; 47L. J. P. 59 1228 Dalton 0. Fitzgerald [1897] 2 Ch. 86 66 L. J. Ch. 604 76 L. T. 700 45 W. R. 685 C. A 810 Damerell . Prothero (1847) 10 Q. B. 20 ; 16 L. J. Q. B. 170 ; 11 Jur. 331 551 Danby. Tuckir (1883) 31 W. R. 578 939 Dancer o. Crabb (1873) L. R. 3 P. & M. 98 42 L. J. P. 53 28 L. J. 914 1250 Dand v. Kingscote (1840) 9 L. J. Ex. 279 6 M. & W.'i74 706, 708 Dand v. Sexton (1789) 3 T. R. 37' 407 D'Angibau, Re (1880) 15 Ch. D. 228 49 L. J. Ch. 756 43 L. T. 35 ; 28 W. R. 930 C. A. 866,899,975 Daniel, Re [1917J 2 Ch. 405; 117 L. T. 472: 61 Sol. Jo. 646 33 T. L. R.
. . . ; ; ; . . ; ;
. :
....
.
.
........
; ; ; ;
_53
Daniel 0. Ferguson [1891] 2 Ch. 27 Daniel 0. Hanslip (1672) 2 Lev. 67 Daniels v. Fielding (1846) 16 M. &
Dann
v.
Spurrier (1803) 3 B.
i?c (1895) 13
&
P. 399
119
Danson,
R. 633 Darby v. Harris (1841) i Q. B. 895 i G. & D. 234 Darcy (Lord) v. Askwith (1618) Hobart, 234 D'Arcyo. Blake (1805) 2 Sch. &Lef. 387 Darell v. Bridge (1749) i W. Bl. 46 Darell u. Wybarne.(i56o) 2 Dyer, 207 b
;
.
....... ........
39
W.
R. 599
121
C. A.
376, 401
678
W.
200
4 Dow.
&
L. 329
16 L. J. Ex.
492
620 1082 972
650 684 690
7 R. R. 797
7 Ves. 231
6 R. R,
.....
;
Jur. 988
785, 790
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Darke, In the Goods 0/(1859) 8 y/. R. 273
'
xcvii
PAGE
Sw.
&
Tr. 516
29 L. J. P. 71
2 L. T. 24
1332 v. Bowditch (1846) 8 Q. B. 973 633 Darley o. Tennant (1885) 53 L. T. 257 84.3,996 Darley Main Colliery Co. v. Mitchell (1886) L. R. 11 App. Ca. 127; 55 L. J. Q. B. 529; 54L. T. 882; 51 J. P. 148; 32W. R. 947 C. A. 327, 367, 373 Darnley, Re [1907] i Ch. 159 76 L. J. Ch. 58 95 L. T. 706 23 T. L. R.
Darke
93
Dashwood Dashwood
C.
0.
v.
A
W.
Blythway (1729) I Eq. Ca. Ab. 317 Magniac [1891] 3 Ch. 306 60 L. J. Ch. 809
;
..... ......
;
"21
82P
65 L. T. 811
787,789
871
;
70 L. J. K. B. 695
84 L. T. 649
:
R. 546 504 12 v. Bishop (1846) i Ph. 698 affirming 2 Y. & C. C. C. 451 iioi L. J. Ch. 492 ; 7 Jur. 1077 Davenport v. Coltman (1842) 12 Sim. 610 ; 6 Jur. 404 1359 Daveron, Re [1893] 3 Ch. 421 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 54 69 L. T. 752 42 W. R. 24 ; 1079, 1 104 3 R. 685 David 0. Britannic Coal Co. [1909] 2 K. B. 146 78 L. J. K. B. 659 100 L. T. 678 53 Sol. Jo. 398 25 T. L. R. 431 affirmed (H. L.) 54 Sol. Jo. iji ; 26 T. L. R. 164 . 445, 449 Davidson v. Cooper (1844) 13 M. & W. 343 12 L. J. Ex. 467 688 . Davidson . Moscrop (1801) 2 East, 56 6 R. R. 373 Davidson & Co. v. Officer [1918] A. C. 304 87 L. J. P. C. 58 118 L. T. 451 ; 456 W. C. & I. Rep. 136 62 Sol. Jo. 347 34 T. L. R. 213 H. L. (Sc.) 698 Davies' Case (1598) Cro. Eliz. 611 61 L. J. Ch. 595 869 Davies, Re [1892] 3 Ch. 63 67 L. T. 1548 41 W. R. 13 832 Davies v. Chamberlain (1909) 26 T. L. R. 138 C. A 207 Davies v. Davies (1839) 9 C. & P. 87 Davies v. Davies (1887) 36 Ch. D. 359; 56 L. J. 962; 58 L. T. 209; 36 42 W. R. 86C. A Davies v. Davies (1888) 38 Ch. D. 499 57 L. J. Ch. 1093 ; 58 L. T. 514 36 626 W. R. 399
Davenport
.149
.
. England (1864) 33 L. J. Q. B. 321 10 Jur. (N. S.) 1235 445 Humphreys, (1840) 6 M. & W. 153 9 L. J. Ex. 263 4 Jur. 250.. .295, 297 102 L. T. Davies' and Kent's Contract [i^io] 2 Ch. 35 79 L. J. Ch. 689
Davies Davies
v.
v.
622C. A
Davies
Davies
11.
877, 1077
Jii
v.
;
47 L.
J. Ch.
293.
;
Nicholson (1858) 2 De G. & J. 693 27 L. J. Ch. 719 5 Jur. (N. S.) 1367 49 6 W. R. 790 Davies v. Parry [1899] i Ch. 602; 68 L. J. Ch. 346; 47 W. R. 429 15 1372, 1379, 1380 T. L. R. 186 Davies v. Penton (1827) 6 B. & C. 216 9 D. & R. 369 5 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 137 H2; 30R. R. 298 Davies v. Solomon (1871) L. R. 7 Q. B. 112 41 L. J. Q. B. 10 25 I.. T. 473, 523 799 20 W. R. 167 Davies v. Thomas [1920J 2 Ch. 189 89 L. J. Ch. 338 64 Sol. Jo. 529 36 483 T. L. R. 571 C. A 11 Jur. 750 16 L. J. Q. B. 369 465, 466 Davies v. WiUiams (1847) lo Q. B. 725 4 Davies . Williams (1851) 16 Q. B. 546 1334, '345 Davis, In the Goods of (i860) 4 Sw. & Tr. 21 3 ; 29 L. J. P. 72 1050 Davis, Re (1888) 22 Q. B. D. 193 37 W. R. 203 C. A
; ; ;
;
C.L.
Digitized
by Microsoft
XCVUl
TABLE OF CASES
; ;
Re; Hannen v. Hillyer [igtfz] i Ch. 876 71 L. J. Ch. 459 86 L. T. 292; 50 W. R. 37S Davis, Re ; Davis v. Davis [1902] 2 Ch. 314 71 L. J. Ch. 539 86 L. T. 523 51 W. R. 8 Davis, iJe; Griffith 0. Davis (1902) 86 L. T. 889 Davis, 7n <iesto(e o/[i9o6] P. 330 75 L. J. P. 94 Davis . Bowsher (1794) 5 T. R. 488 Davis o. Danks (1849) 3 Exch. 435 18 L. J. Ex. 213 Davis V. Davis [1918] P. 85 87 L. J. P. 53 118 L. T. 649 62 Sol. Jo. 384 Davis V. Duncan (1874) L. R. 9.C. P. 396 43 L. J. C. P. 185 30 L. t. 464
Davis,
.
.
1 1
12
'
1124
.... ....
: ; _ ' . .
. . . .
179
R. 575 ; 526 Freethy (1890) 24 Q. B. D. 519 59 L. J. Q. B. 318 41 V. Gardiner (1593) 4 Rep. 16 Poph. 36 2 Bulst. 89, go 505 1 113 V. Hutehihgs [1907] i Ch. 356 76 L. J. Ch. 272 96 L. T. '293 V. Marrable [1913] 2 Ch. 421 82 L. J. Ch. 510 109 L. T. 33 57 Sol. Jo. 702 712 29 T. L. R. 617 211 Davis B. Marshall (1861) 4 L. T. 216 9 W. R. 520 Davis . Mayor of Bromley (1908) i K. B. 170 24 T. L. R. 1 1 71 J. P. 513 ; 328 5 L. G. R. 1229 C. A. Davis V. Morgan (1852) 4 B. & C. 9 ; 6 Dow. & Ry. (K. B.) 42 28 R. R. 193 671 Davison, i?c (1888) 58 L. T. 304 15 Davison v. Gent (1857) i H. & N. 744 26 L. J. Ex. 122 3 Jur. (N. S.) 342 5 W. R. 229 389, 390 Davy, Re [1908] 1 Ch. 61 77 L. J. Ch. 67 97 L. T. 654-^C. A. 1123, 1271 Boucher (1839) 3 Y. & Coll. Exch. 357; 3 Jur. 674 ^'^^ Davys e. Dawkins 0. Lord Paulet (1869) L. R. Q. B. 94 39 L. J. Q. B. 53 21 L. T. l8 \V. R. 336 584 9 B. & S. 768 489, 513 Dawkins v. Lord Penrhyn (1878) L. R. 4 App. Ca. 51 48 L. J. Ch. 304 ; 39 .' L. T. 583; 27W. R. 173 564 Dawkins v. Lord Rokeby (1866) 4 F. & F. 806 442, 489 Dawkins v. Lord Rokeby (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 255 42 L. J. Q. B. 63 28 L. T. 134 21 W. R. 544 affirmed (1875) L. R, 7 H. L. 744 45 L. J. Q. B. 8 ; 23 W. R. 931 33 L, T. 196 342,489,512 Dawson v. Bank of Whitehaven (1877) 6 Ch. D. 218 46 L. J. Ch. 884 37 L. T. 64 26 W. R. 34 ^323, 1324 Dawson v. Bingley U. C. [1911! 2 K. B. 149 80 L. J. K. B. 842 104 L. T. 659 i 75 J- P- 289 9 L. G. R. 502 55 SoL Jo. 346 ; 27 T. L. R. 308 C. A. ^28 Dawson 11. G. N. & City Ry. Co, [1904] i K. B. 277 73 L. J. K. B. 174 ; 68 90 L. T. 20 20 T. L. R. 87 [1901;] I K. B. 260 74 L. J. J. P.214 K. B. 190 69 J. P. 29 92 L. T. 137 21 T. L. R. 114 C. A. 365, 366 i Kay, 280 2 Eq. R. 230 Dawson v. Lawes (1854) 23 L. J. Ch. 434 2 W. R. 213 299 Day, Re [1898] 2 Ch. 510 67 L. J. Ch. 619 77 L. T. 436 47 W. R. 238 1395 Day . Austin (1595) Owen, 70 412 Day V. Sream (1837) 2 Moo. & Rob. 54 505 Day V. Brownrigg (1878) 10 Ch. D. 294 48 L. J. Ch. 173 39 L. T. 553 27 W. R. 217 C. A. 375 Day V. Day (1854) Kay, 703 573 Day 0. Luhke(i8'68) L. R. 5 Eq. 336; 37L. J. Ch. 330 49 Day V. McLea (1889) 58 L. J. Q. B. 293 22 Q. B. D. 610 60 L. T. 947 37 W. R. 483 ;U- P- 532C. a: 151 Dayrell v. Champness (1700) i Eq. Cas. Ab. 400 668 Deacon v. S. E. Ry. Co. (1889) 61 L. T. 377 706, 707 Dean, iJe(i889)4i Ch. D. 552; 58 L. J. Ch. 693; 66 L. T. 813 1098 22
. .
W.
V.
....
.
i;
....
'
'.
'
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Dean Dean
v.
v.
xcix
PAGE
P. 54 Dean o. Keate (i8ii) 3 Camp. 4 ; 13 R. R. 735 196 Deane v. Clayton (1817) 7 Taunt. 489 ; 2 Marshall, 577 ; i Moore, 203 . 446, 775 Dearie v. Hall (1823) 3 Ru88. i ; 2 L. J. (O. S.) Ch. 62 ; 27 R. R. i . 760, 1 153 De Beauvoir v. Owen (1850) 5 Exch. 166 ; 19 L. J. Ex. 177 77 De Beers v. British South Africa Co. [1910] i Ch. 354 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 345 ; 102 L. T. 95 ; 26 T. L. R. 285 ; 54 Sol. Jo. 289 ; 17 Mans. 190 ; affirmed [1910] 2 Ch. 502 ; 103 L. T. 4 ; 26 T. L. R. 591 ; 54 Sol. Jo. 679 C. A. ; reversed [1912] A. C. 52 81 L. J. Ch. 137 ; 105 L. T. 683 ; 28 T. L. R. 830, 832, 840, 1009, ion, 1013 114; 56 Sol. Jo. 175 Debenham v. Mellon (1880) L. R. 6 App. Ca. 24; 50 L. J. Q. B. 155 ; 43 L. T. 673 ; 29 W. R. 141 ; 45 J. P. 252 56, 57 De Bussche v. Alt (1877) 8 Ch. D. 286 ; 47 L. J. Ch. 381 ; 38 L. T. 370 . 230, 231 De Cordova v. De Cordova (1879) L. R. 4 App. Ca. 692 ; 41 L. T. 43 ii^ii Dee Estates, Re [191 1] 2 Ch. 85 ; 80 L. J. Ch. 461 ; 104 L. T. 903 55'Sol. Jo. 962 424; 18 Mans. 247 C. A. 1268 Decks V. Strutt (1794) 5 T. R. 690 Deeley v. Lloyds' Bank [1912] A. C. 756 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 697 ; 107 L. T. 465 ; 29 T. L. R. I 56 Sol. Jo. 734 1143 Deering 0. Lord Winchelsea (1787) i Cox, 318 ; 2 Bos. & P. 270 ; i R. R. 41 297
Car.
&
'
44
......382
...
....
....
;
Deeze, Ar^ae (1748) I Atk. 228 De Francesco v. Barnum (1890) 45 Ch. D. 430 438 39 W. R. 5 Defries v. Milne [1913] i Ch. 98 82 L. J. Ch. i
i ;
962
60 L.
;
J.
Ch. 63
63 L. T.
27C. A
[1914] P. 53 ; 83 L. J. . . . P. 40 ; no L. T. 121 ; 30 T. L. R. 329 ; 58 Sol. Jo. 341 Degg V. Midland Ry. Co. (1857) i H. & N. 773 ; 26 L. J. Ex. 171 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 395 ; 5 W. R. 364 Deichman, / rie Goorfs 0/(1842) 3 Curt. 123 Delacherois v. Delacherois (1864) H. L. C. 62 ; 4 N. R. 501 ; 10 Jur.
........
;
107 L. T. 593
1374 1204
58 1330
De De
10 L. T. 884 ; 13 W. R. 24 584, 691 la Saussaye, In the Goods of (1873) L. R. 3 P. & M. 42 ; 42 L. J. P. 47 ; 1240, 1247 28 L. T. 368 i 21 W. R. 549 la Warr (Eari) v. Miles (1880) 17 Ch. D. 535 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 754 ; 44 L. T."
(N. S.) 886
;
715 29 W. R. 809 8 C. & P. 444 Highley (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 950 5 Scott, 154 49' 3 Hodges, 158 ; 6 L. J. 0. P. 337 3' Dehnar, Ex parte (1890) 38 W. R. 752 De Mattos v. Benjamin (1894) 63 L. J. Q. B. 248 ; 70 L. T. 560 42 W. R. 312 284; 10 R. 103 De Medina v. Grove (1846) 10 Q. B. 1 52 ; 15 L. J. Q. B. 284 10 Jur. 426 494 De Moleyns' and Harris' Contract [1908] i Ch. no; 77 L. J. Ch. 9; 97 888, 917 L. T. 650 ; 51 Sol. Jo. 824 De Montaigu v. De Montaigu [i 9 13] P. 154 109 L. T. 79 29 T. L. R. 654 1204 57 Sol. Jo. 703 Denaby v. Yorkshire Miners [1906] A. C. 384 75 L. J. K. B. 961 95 L. T. 479 561 ; 22 T. L. R. 543 Denby, Re (1861) 3 De G. F. & J. 35 5 3i L. J. Ch. 184 ; 5 L. T. 514 10 1285 W. R. ns 472 Dengate v. Gardiner (1838) 4 M. & W. 5 ; 7 L. J. Ex. 201 5 Jur. 470 617,619 Denn p. Cartwright (i8o3)4East, 31
487
Delegal
o.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Denn v. Fearnside (1747) i Wils. 176 Denn v. Spray (1786) i T. R. 466 , Denne v. Light (1857) 8 De G. M. & G. 774
627 Dennett
;
.......
;
PAGE
641 1^97
26 L.
J.
Ch. 459
;
187 Pass (1834) i Bing. N. C. 388 ; i Scott, 218 4 L. J. C. P. 70.. .680, 740 Denney v. Conklin [1913] 3 K.. B. 177 ; 82 L. J. K. B. 953 109 L. T. 444 1048 29 T. L. R. 598 61 Denning o. Sec. of State (1920) 37 T. L. R. 138 Dennis, / Ae Gooiii o/fi 891] P. 326 1253 68 L. J. P. 67 Dennis, In the Goods of\i%<)^ P. 191 , 1336 Dent V. Dent (1867) L. R. i P. & D. 366 ; 36 L. J. M. 61 15 L. T. 635 ; 15 W. R. 591 999 Dent 0. Turpin (1861) 2 J. & H. 139 ; 30 L. J. Ch. 495 7 Jur. (N. S.) 673 ; L. T. 637 9 W. R. 548 4 349, 1085 De Pereda 0. De Mancha (1881) 19 Ch. D. 451 51 L. J. Ch. 204 30 W. R. 226 1230, ( . D'Epineuil, iif (1882) 2oCh. D. 758: 47L. T. 157; 30 W. R. 702 1052 Dering v. Winchelsea (Earl) (1787) 1 Cox, Eq. Cas. 318 2 Bos. & P. 270 1422 Derisley . Custance (1790) 4 T. R. 75 1364 Derry v. Handley (1867) 16 L. T. 263 507 61 L. T. Derry v. Peek (1889) L. R. 14 App. Ca. 337 58 L. J. Ch. 864 265 ; 38 W. R. 33 ; I Meg. 292; 39, 536, 538, 539, 540 Derry 11. Sanders [1919] i K. B. 223 ; 88 L. J. K. B. 410 ; 120 L. T. 194; 63 Sol. Jo. 115 35 T. L. R. 105 C. A 605,854 Deschamps v. Miller [1908] i Ch. 856 77 L. J. Ch. 416 ; 98 L. T. 564. 1 105 Sommery, .Re [1912] 2 Ch. 622 82 L. J. Ch. 17 De 107 L. T. 253 57 Sol. Jo. 78 877 De Teissier, Re [1893] i Ch. 153 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 552 ; 68 L. T. 275 ; 41 W. R. 1130 184; 3 R. 103 Detmold . Detmold (1889) 40 Ch. D. 585 ; 58 L. J. Ch. 495 ; 61 L. T. 21 ; 37 W. R. 442 44 Devereux 0. Barclay (1819) 2 B. & Aid. 702 2i R. R. 45 416 Deverges 11. Sandeman [1902] i Ch. 579 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 328 86 L. T. 269 18 T. L. R. 375 C. A 50 W. R. 404 955 De Vitre v. Betts (1873) L. R. 6 H. L. 319 42 L. J. Ch. 841 21 W. R. 705 378 Devonald v. Rosser & Sons (1905) 93 L. T. 274 ; 21 T. L. R. 595 ; affirmed 22 T. L. R. [1906] 2 K. B. 728 75 L. J. K. B. 688 ; 95 L. T. 232 ^82C. A 208, 222 Dew V. Clark (1826) 3 Add. 79 1257 Dewar . Tasker & Sons (1907) 23 T. L. R. 259 C. A. 351 Dewell'o. Sanders (1618) Cro. Jac. 490 358, 361 Dewey v. Bayntun (1805) 6 East, 257 ; 8 R. R. 475. 1062 Dewey o. White (1827) Moo. & Malk. 56 386 Dewhurst o. Mather [1908] 2 K. B. 754 77 L. J. K. B. 1077 99 L. T. 568 ; 24 T. L. R. 819 458 Dey V. Mayo [1920] 2 K. B. 346 ; 89 L. J. K. B. 241 122 L. T. 742 ; 64 Sol. Jo. 240 36 T. L. R. 217C. A 313 D'Huart v. Harkness (1865) 34 Beav. 324 ; 34 L. J. Ch. 31 1 11 Jur. (N. S.) 633; i.^ W. R. 513; 5N. R. 440 1241 Diamond Co. v. Mining Co. (1915) 60 Sol. Jo. 42 32 T. L. R. 47 43^6 Dibble 0. Bowater (1853) 2 E. & B. 564 22 L. J. Q. B. 396 ; 17 Jur. 1054 ; I W. R. 435 622 Dibdin v. Skirrow {1908] i Ch. 41 77 L. J. Ch. 107 97 L. T. 658 71 T. L. R. 70 6 L. G. R. io8 696 J. P. 555 ; 24
5
v.
W.
R. 430
..... .......
. . . ; ; ; ; .
....... .......
; .
....
; ;
. ; ; ; ;
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Dibdin v. Swan (1793) i Esp. 28 Dickenson v. Teesdale (1862) i De G. (N. S.)237; 7L. T. 655 Dickin . Edwards (1844) 4 Ha. 272
ci
Dickins v. Hampstead (1729) Fitz. 87 Dickinson . Capper (1616) I Rolle Rep. Dickinson v. Dickinson [1913] P. 198 (otherwise P.), 29 T. L. R. 765 58 Dickinson v. Dodds (1876) 2 Ch. D. 463 W. R. 594 Dickman v. Allen (1690) 2 Ventr. 138 Dickson, Re (1883) 29 Ch. D. 331 54 L.
;
;
526
r,
J.
&
S.
52
32 L. J. Ch. 37
9 Jur.
76,866
^
1398 849
215 109 L. T. 408 ; sub nom. D. v. D. Sol. Jo. 32 34 L. T. 607 24 45 L. J. Ch. 777
;
955
1
177
'
.
718
Ch. 510
;
511 C.
Dickson
v.
J.
52 L. T. 707
33
W.
;
R.
G. N. Ry. Co. (1886) 18 Q. B. D. 176 56 L. J. Q. B. in 55 L.T. 868; 35 W. R. 202; 51 J. P. 388 249,256,257 Dickson v. Renter's Telegraph Co. (1877) 3 C. P. D. i 329, 336 Digby V. Financial News [1907] i K. B. 502 76 L. J. K. B. 321 96 L. T. 172; 23T. L. R. 117 509,510,511 Diggle V. Higgs (1877) 2 Ex. D. 422 46 L. J. Ex. 721 37 L. T. 27 ; 25 W. R. 777 311 Dighton V. Greenvil (n. d.) 2 Vent. 321 648 DiUon, Re (1890) 44 Ch. D. 76 62 L. T. 614 ; 38 W. R. 59 L. J. Ch. 420 983, 1291, 1292 369 C. A. Dillon o. Dillon (1842) 3 Curt. 86 1195 Dimes v. Pettey (1850) 15 Q. B. D. 276 19 L. J. Q. B. 449 14 Jur. 1132. 400 1 122 Dimes v. Scott (1827) 4 Russ. 195 28 R. R. 46 Dimsdale v. Isles (1672) 3 Keb. 166 644 Diplock V. Blackburn (1811) 3 Camp. 43 13 R. R. 744 235 Diplock V. Hammond (1854) 5 De G. M.' & G. 320 23 L. J. Ch. 550 2 W. R. 1051 500 1268. 1422 Dix o. Burford (1854) 19 Beav. 409 Dixon, i?e(i889)42Ch. D. 306; 61 L. T. 718; 38 W. R. 91 1087 Dixon, Re [1900] 2 Ch. 561'; 69 L. J. Ch. 689 83 L. T. 129 48 W. R. 665 C. 1183 88 L. T. 862 Dixon, Re [1903] 2 Ch. 458 72 L. J. Ch. 642 51 W. R.
;
. . . ;
....
;
; .
"35
........... .......
; ;
'
............
; ;
....
;
.
652
Dixon V. Bell (1816) 5 M. & S. 198 i Stark. 287 17 R. R. 308 Dixon V. Clarke (1848) 5 C. B. 365 5 D. & L. 155 16 L. J. C. P. 237. Dixon V. Dixon (1878) 9 Ch. D. 587 48 L. J. Ch. 592 40 L. T. 208
; ; . ; ; ; ;
107 .183
27
239 233
681
W.
R. 282
;
Dixon V. Ewart (1817) 3 Mer. 322 Buck, 94 Dixon V. Hammond (1819) 2 B. & Aid. 310 Dixon V. James (1698) Freem. 273 Dixon o. Robinson (1686) 3 Mod. 107 Dixon V. White (1883) L. R. 8 App. Ca. S33 Dixon V. Yates (1833) 5 B. & Ad. 313 2 Nev. Dobree v. Napier (1836) 2 Bing. (N. C.) 202
.
692
& M.
2 L. J. K. B. i 3 Scott, 201 ; 5 L. J. C.
177
781 921
341 235 510
273
2 Hodges, 84
Docker
r.
Somes (1834)
;
.
3 L. J. Ch.
Dockrell
v.
Dodd
Dodd
94
L,
1189
Dodwell
Doe
V.
Sid.
433
469 432
16
Digitized
by Microsoft
cii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
0. o.
Doe Doe
(
389
Q. B. 306; i3j"''-9'5
'
,18 L. J.
3^9)
.;
'
Doeo. Barton (1840) II A. &E. 307; 3 P. & D. 194 9 L. J. Q. B. 57 4 Jur. ^ 432 Doe V. Baytup (1835) 3 A. & E. 188 4 N. &'M. 837 ; i H. & W. 270 4 L. J. K B. 263 Doe d. Rigge v. Bell (1793) J T. R. 471 ; 2 R. R. 642 .
; ;
.
..........
; .
.
390
.
642
390
618 621
Doe Doe
Doe Doe Doe
(1845) 7 Q. B. 976 ; 14 L. J. Q. B. 342 9 Jur. 662 . V. Benjamin (1839) 9 A. & E. 644 ; i P. & D. 440 ; 2 W. W. & H. 96 8 L. J. Q. B. 117
V.
;
Benham
614
615
.
V.
SI.
20
V.
Day
...........
;
Man.
&
Ry. 33
;
6 L. J. (0. S.) K. B.
650
(1842) 2
Q';
B. 147
2 G.
913
Doe V. Dixon (1807) 9 East, 14 Doeo. Dorvell(i794) 5T. R. 518 Doe V. Dyball (1829) Moo. & Malk. 346
I
.......
;
.
&
D. 757
12 L. J. Q. B. 86
6 Jur.
.
620 656
M.
&
P. 330
Doe
V.
Giles (1829) 5
30 R. R. 686
Doeo. Eyre(i848) 5 Doe 0. Hare (1833) 2 C. & M. 146 Doe V. Harlow (1840) 12 A. & E. 40 Doe o. Knight (1826) 5 B. & C. 471 8 Dow.
;
; 8 B. & C. 70 ; 2 M. & Ry. 184 6 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 317 ; 3 Car. & P. 610 390 Bing. 421 ; 2 M. c& P. 749 ; 7 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 134 642, 64s, 646 . C. B. 713 .
.
.906
19 18
& Ry.
K. B. 348
:
4 L.
J. (0. S.)
K. B. 161
29 R. R. 355
;
Doe V. Lightfoot (1841) 8 M. & W. 553 11 L. J. Ex. 151 5 Jur. 966 Doe V. Manning (1807) 9 East, 59 9 R. R. 503 Doe V. Martin (1790) 4 T. R. 39 Doe V. Morris (1835) ^ Bing. N. C. i8g 2 Scott, 276 i Hodges, 215 4 L.
;
.
.....
.
812
818, 819
814
875 S48 811
J.
C. P. 285
Oliver (1830) 5 Man. & Ry. K. B. 202 V. Pearsey (1827) 7 B. & C. 304 v. Penfold (1838) 8 C. & P. 536 V. Rivers (1797) 7 T. R. 276 0. Roberts (1819) 2 B. & Aid. 367 d. Hampton o. Shotter (1838) 9 A. & E. 905 V. Skirrow (1837) 7 A^ & E. 157 ; 2 Nev. & P. 123
V.
810 1409
517
..
Will.
Smythe (1815) 4M. & S. 347: 16 R. R. 486 Gray v. Stanion (1836) i M. & W. 695 5 L.
;
;
.390.
186, 193
J.
Ex. 253.
;
Stone (1846) 3 C. B. 176; 15 L. J. C. P. 234 VardUl (1835) 2 CI. & F. 571 (1840) 7 CI. & F. S95
;
810
9 Bligh (N. S.)
.
Doe Doe
Watts (1797) 7 T. R. 83 ; 2 Esp. 501 4 R. R. 387 . w. Whichelo (1799) 8T. R. 211 Doe.William8(i836)5A. &E. 291 6N. &M. 816; 2 H. & W. 213 5 L. J. K. B. 231 Doe d. Clayton v. Williams (1843) 11 M. & W. 803 12 L. J. Ex. 420 DoeringB. Doering (1889) 42 Ch. D. 203; 58 L. J. Ch. 553; 37 'W. R.
V.
. ; ; ; .
1298 618
571
642 690
1
796 Doherty
v.
AUman
143
39 L. T. 129
26
W. R.
513
577,62,6
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
; ;
cm
Doherty-Waterhouse, Re [1918] 2 Ch. 269 87 L. J. Ch. 630 119 L. T. 2 62 Sol. Jo. 636 869 Doidge V. Carpenter (1817) 6 M. & S. 47 18 R. R. 299 678 DoUond V. Johnson (1854) 2 Sm. & G. 301 2 Eq. R. 621 23 L. J. Ch. 637 18 Jur. 767; 2 W. R. 505 1376 Dolphin V. Robins (1859) 7 H. L. C. 390 3 Macq. H. L. 563 29 L. J. P. II 5 Jur. (N. S.) 1271 ; 7 W. R. 674 3 Don, Re (1857) 4 Drew. 194 27 L. J. Ch. 98 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 119255 W. R 836 1298 Don's Estate, Re (1857) 4.Drew. 194 27 L. J. Ch. 98 3 Jur. (N. S.) 1192 " 1206 5 W. R, 836 Donald v. Suckling (1866) L. R. 1 Q. B. 5S5 35 L. J. Q. B. 232 7 B. & S. 12 Jur. (N. S.) 795 14 L. T. 772 15 W. R. 13 783 416, 955, 956 Donations (Commissioners oi)v. Wybrants C1845) 2 Jo. & La. 182; 7 Ir. Eq. R. c8o 756 Doncaster v. Doncaster (1856) 3 K. & J. 26 2 Jur. (N. S.) 1066 580 Donegal's (Lord) Case ({751) 2 Ves. Sen. 407 1258 Donellan o. Read (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 899 Donoughmore's Estate, i?c [1911] I I. R. 211 1076 Donovan v. Laing [1893] i Q. B. 629 63 L. J. Q. B. 25 4 R. 317 68 L. T. 512 ; 41 W. R. 455 351, 352 57 J. P. 583C. A. Doody, Re [1893] i Ch. 129 62 L. J. Ch. 14 67 L. T. 650 41 W. R. 49 2 R. 166 n. .1124 Doorman v. Jenkins (1834) 2 A. & E. 256 4 N. & M. 170 4 L. J. K. B. 29 204 Dosso. Doss (1866) 14L. T. (N. S.)646i 14W. R. 590 P. C. 413 Dothie V. Macandrew [igo8] i K. B. 803 77 L. J. K. B. 388 98 L. T. 495 24 T. L. R. 326 463 Dougal V. McCarthy [1893] i Q. B. 736 62 L. J. Q. B. 462 68 L. T. 699 ." 4.1 W. R. 484 57^ J. P. 597 4 R. 402 Douglas, Re (1884) 28 Ch. D. 327 52 L. T. 131 54 L. J. Ch. 421 33 W. R, 39 553.753 Douglas V. Andrews (1849) 12 Beav. 310 ig L. J. Ch. 69 . 14 Jur. 73 1214 Douglas c. Douglas (1871) L. R. 12 Eq. 625 3 Douglas V. Dysart (Earl) (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 688 : 6 L. T. 327 . 595Douglas V. Forrest (1828) 4 Bing. 686 6 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 157 : M. & P. 1386 663 29 R. R. 695 Douglas V. Lock (1835) 2 A. & E. 705 673 Douglas o. Patridc (1790) 3 T. R. 683 i R. R. 793 107, 108 Douglas-Menzies v. Umphelby [1908] A. C. 224 77 L. J. P. C. 64 98 L. T. 1277 509 24 T. L. R. 344 Dovaston v. Payne (1795) 2 H. Bl. 527 3 R. R. 497 358 . Dowglas V. Kendall (1609) Cro. Jac. 256 617 Dowling c. Mill (1816) I Madd. 541 Downshire (Marquis) v. Sandys (1801) 6 Ves. 107 792 Dowse, Re (1881) 50 L. J. Ch. 285 29 W. R. 563 991 64 L. T. 809 ; 40 Dowse 0. Gorton [1891] A. C. 190 60 L. J. Ch. 745 1113,1404,1405,1416,1417 W. R. 17 . 1264 Dowsett, Re [1901] i Ch. 398 70 L. J. Ch. 149 49 W. R. 268 . 1333 Doyle V. Blake (1804) 2 Sch. & Lef. 231 ; 9 R. R. 76 Dovle V. Falkener (1866) L. R. i P. C. 328 4 Moore, P. C. (N. S.) 203 ; 36 ' 511 L. J. P. C. 34; 15 W. R. 366 Drake, Ex parte {lijj) 5 Ch. D. 866 i Mont. D. & D. 539 3 Deac. & C. 284 425 1210 Drapers. Glenfield (1631) 2 Bulstr. 345 992 Drayton, ZJe (1912) 56 Sol. Jo. 253 i W. R. 318 Ch. 717 1315 . Pirew " Long (1853) 22 L. 17 Jur. 173
; ;
;
...... ......
.
.
.'
.619
.......
;
.......
;
. .
.....
.
.....715
. . .
.
.......
; ; ; .
J.
Digitized
by Microsoft
CIV
TABLE OF CASES
V. Nurin (1879) 4 Q- ^- ^- ^^' L. J. Q. B. 591 ; 40 L. T. 671 J 27 W. R. 810 59> 238 Drewetl t). Tovyler (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 735 i L. K. B. 228 714 J. Drewry o. Thacker(i8i9) 3 Swanst. 546 1419 Dreyfus o. Peruvian Guano" Co. (1889) 42 Ch. D. 66 58 L. J. Ch 758 62 L. T. 518 affirmed 4S Ch. D. 316 373 Drinkwater ii. Goodwin (1775) i Cowp. 251 56 Driver o. Broad [1893] i Q'. B. 744 ; 63 L. J. Q. B. 12 69 L. T. i6g'; 41 W. R, 483 C. A. \ 841 Driver v. Thompson (1812) 4 Taunt. 294 13 R. R. 592 90s Drummond v. Drummond (1861) 30 L. J. P. & M. 177; 4 L. T. 4r6 1 Jur. (N. S.) 762 194 Drummond v. Parish (1843) 3 Curt. 522 1243 Drury 0. Kent (1603) Cro. Jac. 15 678 Drybutter . Bartholoniew (1723) 2 P. Wms. 127 15 Duberley . Gunning (1792} 4 T; R. 651 Peake, 97 ; 3 R. R. 664 369 Duberley v. Page (1788) 2 T. R. 391 718 Dubois V. Keats (1840) 1 1 A. & E. 329 3 Per. & Dav. 506 ; 9 L. J. Q. B. 66 4 Jur. 148 493 Du Bost . Beresford (1810) 2 Camp. 511 500 Gill (1830) 4 Car. & P. 121 Ducarry . 63 Duck V. Mayeu [1892] 2 Q. B. 511 62 L. J. Q. B. 69 4 R. 38 67 L. T. 336 547 41 W. R. 56 ; 57 J. P. 23-C. A. Duckworth-,!!. Lee [1899] i I. R. 405 1292 Du Crds, Re [1913] A. C. 624 57 Sol. Jo. 728 29 T. L. R. 772 30 R. P. C. 660' 1025 Duder v. An^sterdamsch Trustees Kantoor [1902] 2 Ch. 132 71 L. f. Ch 87L. T. 22 618 ; 50 W. R. 551 339 Dudson's Contract, Re (1873) 8 Ch. D. 628 47 L. J. Ch. 632 ; 39 L. T. 182 27 W. R. 179 566 Duff's Executors' Case (1886) 32 Ch. D. 301 54 L. T. 558 C. A, Nuffield o. Elwes (1827) I Bligh (N. S.) 497 983,984,1290,
.
Drew
'
.....
.
.
.... .....
.
'^9'> '292 Pereira (1769), Dick. 419 1246 Q' B. D. Dufourcet s. Bishop (1S86) 18 373 ; 56 L. J. Q. B. 497 ; 56 L. T. . . . 633 ; 6 Asp. M. C. 109 Jig Dugdale, TJe (1888) 38 Ch. D. 176; 57 L. J. Ch. 634; 58 L. T. 181 ; 36 ^ W. R.,462 558. 559 Dugdale o. Dugdalle (;888) 38 Ch. D. 176 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 634 ; 58 L. T. 581 ;
I
Dufour
o.
.......
. .
1
....
.
36W.
Dugley
o.
R. 462
...
.
,
.
-.
.
.43,44,931
.
1233
......
.
.
85 L. T. 126
.
50 454, 523
795^796
1084, 1087,
1
loi L. T. 553
26T.
L. R. 21;
54 Sol.
102
,',
Duncan Duncan
v.
11.
;
Benson (1847)
317
W. R.
561
v.
.'
.
1149,1150
298 522
124
&
50 L. J. Ch.
Daniell (1838) 2 Jur. 32 ; 8 C. & P. 222 ; I W. W. Dunkirk Colliery Co. v,. Lpver (1878) 9 Ch. D. 20 ; 39 L. T. 239 841
Duncombe
&
;
H. loi
26
W. R.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Dunkley, Re [1905] 2 K. B. 683 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 963 ; 93 L. T. 248 ; 21 T. L. R. 707 12 Manson, 364 54 W. R. 171 Dunlop V. Macedo (1891) 8 T. L. R. 43 Dunn V. Green (1724) 3 P. Wms. 9 Dunnii. Large. (1783) 3 Doug. 335 Dunn V. Macdonald [1897] i Q.B. 401, 455 ; 66 L. J. Q. B. 420 76 L. T. 444 ; 45 W. R. 355 Dunne v. Anderson (1825) 3 Bing. 88 10 Moore, 407 Ry. & M. 287 Dunne v. Byrne [19:2] A. C. 407 81 L. J. P. C. 202 ; 106 L. T. 394 56 Sol. 28 T. L. R. 257 Jo. 324 49 Sc. L. R. 1025 Dunne 0. English (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 524 Dunraven (Earl) v. Williams (1836) 7 C. & P. 332 Dunsany's Settlement, Re [1906] i Ch. 578 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 356 94 L. T. 361
; ;
. '
cv
PAGE
1066 388 606
18 61
526
1099 232 688
553,
570
Dunwich
(Bailiffs of) v.
Sterry (1831)
i
B.
&
;
Ad. 831
72 L.
;
9 L. J. (0. S.) K. B.
Du
411,932
v.
Cadbury [1903]
K. B. 104
;
J.
K. B. 78
87 L. T.
423
61 L. J. P, 49 Eccl. 733
.
66 L. T. 267
Durham (1885) 10 P. D. 80 27, "75 (Corporation) o. Fowler (1889) 22 Q B. D. 394'; 58 L. J. Q. B 246 ; 60 L. T. 456 299 Durham ii. Northen [1895] P. 66 ; 69 L. T. 691 ; 6 R. 582 . . . 1239 Durham (Bros.) v. Robertson [1898] i Q. B. 765 ; 67 L. j. Q. B. 484 ; 48 L. T. 438 C. A. . 1047 Durham . Wharton (1836) 3 CI. & Fin. 146; 6 L. J. Ch. 15 ; 10 Bligh (N. S.) 526 ; 3 Myl. & K. 698 ; reversing 5 Sim. 297 1283 Duthy and Jesson's Contract, In re [1898] i Ch. 419 ; 67 L. J. Ch. 218 ; 78 L. T. 223 ; 46 W. R. 300 189 Dutton V. Crowdy (1863) 33 Beav. 272 33 L. J. Ch. 241 9 L. T. 630 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 28 ; 12 W. R. 222 ; 3 N. R. 234 . . 1289 Duxbury v. Sandiford (1898) 80 L. T. 552 C. A 609, 616 . . . Dyer o. Dyer (1788) 2 Cox, 92 2 R. R. 14 1102 Dyer v. Munday [1895] i Q. B. 742 ; 64 L. J. Q. B. 448 ; 14 R. 306 ; 72 L. T. 448 ; 43 W. R. 440 ; 59 J. P. 276 C. A 351 Dyers' Co. v. King (1870) L. R. 9 Eq. 438 ; 39 L. J. Ch. 339 ; 22 L. T. 120 ;
v.
Durham Durham
195 194
....
; . . . .
" R. 404 712 Rendall (1852) 2 De G. M. & G. 209 ; 21 L. J. Ch. 905 ; 16 Jur. 939 1322 0. Sweeting (1745) Willes, 587 804 -f 12 Jur. 839 v. Walford (1846) 5 Moo. P. C. 434 1328 Dykes' Estate, Re (1869) L. R. 7 Eq. 337 ; 20 L. T. 292 17 W. R. 658 870 Dynevor (Lord) o. Tennant (1888) L. R. 13 App. Ca. 279 57 L. J. Ch. 671, 673 1078 59 L. T. 5 37 W. R. 193 Dyson, jRe [1910] I Ch. 750 79 L. J. Ch. 433 ; 102 L. T. 425 1357 Dyson v. Forster [1909] A. C. 98 5 78 L. J. K. B. 246 99 L. T. 942 25 104, 628, 629, 802 T. L. R. 166 53 Sol. Jo. 149 H. L. (E.)
18
W.
0.
'
'
A., In re [190:] 2 K. B. 642 70 L. J. K. B. 810 85 L. T. 31 : 49 W. R. 642; 8 Manson, 250 C. A Bade, J!J(:9o6)94L. T. 277; 22T. L. R. 239 Eager 0. Fumivall (1881) 17 Ch. D. 115 50 L. J. Ch. 537; 44 L. T. 464; 29 W. R. 649 45 J. P. 503 Eagleton v. Gutteridge (1843) 11 M. & W. 465 ; 12 L. J. Ex. 359 ; 2 Dow.
E.
W.
155 1387
1313
385
Digitized
by Microsoft
cvi
TABLE OF GASES
PAGE
Granville (Earl) (1876) 3 Ch. D. 826 ; 45 L. J. Ch. 669 ; 34 L. T. 24 W. R. 528 j 594, 780 Lubbock [1905] i K. B. 253 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 121 ; 53 W. R. 145 ; 91
v.
Eardley 609
Earl
o.
L.T. 830
Earle
v.
J36
;
W. R.
Earle c. Peale (1712) I Salfc. 387 Eastern and South African Co. . Cape Town Tramways [1902] A. C. 381 ; 50W. R. 657; 86L. T. 457; 18T. L. R. 523J. C. 71 L. J. P. C. 122 Eastern Archipelago Co. . R. (1853) 2 C. L. R. 145 ; 2 El. & Bl. 856 ; 23 L. J. Q. B. 82 18 Jur. 481 2 W. R. 77 Eastern Counties Ry. Co. . Broom (1851) 20 L. J. Exch. 196 6 Ex. 314
.
.'....'.
;
69 L. J. Ch. 725
83 L. T. 377
"
.
49
29.
.
.-JS
23
406
13 55
Doriing (1859) 28 L. J. C. P. 202 5 C. B. N. S. 821 400 5 Jur. (N. S.) 869 Eastern Counties Ry. Co. 0. Hawkes (1855) 5 H. L. C. 348 24 L. J. Ch. 601 10 3 W. R. 609 Eastern Telegraph Co. o. Dent [1899] i Q. B. 835 68 L. J. Q. B. 564 80 L. T. 459 .. IS T. L. R. 296 C. A., East Greensted Case (1633) Duke, 64 (3) 756, 757 East India a Hensley (1794) I Esp. 112 56 East Indian Railway Co. o. Kalidas Mukerjee [1901] A. C. 396; 70 L. J. P. C. 63 84 L. T. 210 259 Eastland w. Burchell (1878) 3 Q. B. D. 432 38 L. T. 47 L. J. Q. B. 500 ." 568 27 W. R. 290 57 Eastwood V. Bain (1858) 3 H. & N. 738 28 L. J. Ex. 74 7 W. R. 90 540 Eastwood o. Dinke (1731) 2 P. Wms. 613 1282 Eastwood V. Lever (1863) 3 D. J. & S. 103 3 N. R. 232 32 L. J. Ch. 355 ; 12 W, R. 195 28 J. P. 212 9 L. T. 615 377 Eaton o. Bell (1821) 5 B. & Aid. 34 116 Eaton V. Swansea Waterworks Co. (1851) 17 Q. B. 267 20 L. J. Q. B. 482 ; 15 Jur. S75 850 Eberle's Hotels v. Jonas (1887) 18 Q. B. D. 466 56 L. J. Q. B. 278 35 W. R.
v.
;
............
;
,
...........
; ; ;
. .
......
. . .
.627
......
;
. .
'\
467
Eccles
C.
Ecclesiastical Commissioners
.........
. ;
422
1364
67 L. J. P. C. 25
78 L. T. 206
46
W.
J.
R.
v.
R. 544 C. A. 673,711 Parr [1894] 2 Q. B. 420 63 L. J. Q. B. 784 ; 71 L. T. 65 42 W. R. 561 C. A. Ecclesiastical Commissioners o. Penny [1900] 2 Ch. 736 69 L. J. Ch. 844 16 T. L. R. 556 C. A. 83 L. T. 384 ; 49 W. r! 82 Eccleston v. Clipsham (1668) i Saund. 153 ; 2 Keb. 338, 339, 347, 385 . 156 Eckersley s.' Pktt (1866) L. R. i P. & M. 281 36 L. J. P. 7 ; 15 L. T. 327 ; \ 15 W. R. 232 1252 Ecroyd v. Co^lthard [1897] 2 Ch. 554 ; 66 L. J. Ch. 751 ; 77 L. T. 357 61 . 46 W. R. 119 720 J. P. 791 Xdelstein v. Schuler [1902] 2 K. B. 145 71 L. J. K. B. 572 87 L. T. 204 18 T. L.'R. 597 40 W. R. 493 7 Com. Cas. 172 1012 Edelsten o.'Edelsten (1863) i De G. J. & S. 185 7 L. T. 768 9 Jur. (N. S.) 479; II W. R. 328 1029 Edge V. NiccoUs [191 1] A. C. 693 80 L. J. Ch. 745 105 L. T. 459 55 Sol. T. L. R. 555 28 R. P. C. 582 27 Jo. 737 1029 Edgington v. Fitzraaurice (1885) 29 Ch. D. 459 55 L. J. Ch. 650 ; 53 L. T. 369; 33 W.R. 911; 50 J. P. 52 538,540
529; 42 L. T. 201
;
28
W.
v.
Ecclesiastical Commissioners
....
;
49 L.
Ch.
."
.766 .839
.... ....
; ; ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Edmonds v. Blaina Furnaces Co. 57L.T. 139; 35W. R. 798 Edmondson v. Birch & Co. [1907]
415
;
cvii
PAGE
(1887) 36 Ch. D. 215
i
;
56 L. J. Ch. 815
;
1007
K. B. 371
;
76 L. J. K. B. 346
96 L. T.
.
23 T. L. R. 234
v.
'
505, 518
;
Edmondson
Copland [191 1] 2 Ch. 301 80 L. J. Ch. 532 ; 105 L. T. 8 27 T. L. R. 446^ 55 Sol. Jo. 520 Edmondson v. Machell (1787) 2 T. R. 4 Edmund v. Martell (1908) 24 T. L. R. 25 : 52 Sol. Jo. 10 C. A. Edmunds v. A.-G. (1876) 47 L. J. Ch. 345'; 38 L. T. 213 26 W. R. 550 Edmunds v. Bushell (1865) L. R. 1 Q. B. 97 35 L. J. Q. B. 20 12 Jur. (N. S.) 332 55,
. .
829 467
577 998
229
Edmunds v. Edmunds [1904] P. 362 73 L. J. P. Edmundsc. Wallingford(i885) 14Q. B. D. 811 720 33 W. R. 647 49 J. P. 549 C. A
; ; ; ;
97 ; 91 L. T. 568 54 L. J. Q. B. 305
1058, 1059
52 L. T.
Edwardes v. Wootton (1607) Hawarde's Cases in the Star Chamber, 343 502 Edwards, .Ex pflrte (1747) 3 Atk. 519 1218,1219 .Edwards, Ex parte ; Chapman, / re (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 747 ; 51 L. T. 881
. ;
......
; .
317
33
W.
.
R. 268
.
Morrell, 238
234
8 R. 618
. ;
Edwards, Re [1894]
169 308
;
43
W.
.
R.
.
666
901 525
22, 898
Edwards, Re [1910]
Ch. 541
79 L.
J.
Ch. 281
Edwards Edwards
54 Sol. Jo. 32s Bell (1824) i Bing. 403 v. Carter [1893] A. C. 360 J. P. 4; I R. 218
v. v.
... .......
;
102 L. T. 308
26 T. L. R.
63 L. J. Ch. 100
69 L. T. 153
58
Edwards
438
v.
v.
v. v. v.
.......... ......
Edwards
(1834) 2 Cr.
& M.
612; 3 L.
62
;
J.
J. P.
L. J.
1091
1258
Freeman
.
(1727) 2 P.
. .
Wms.
.
435
.
2 Eq. Cas.
.
Abr. 442
.1310
;
Edwards
v.
68 L. J. Q. B. 666
;
80 L. T. 672
. .
47
W.
R. 551
v. v.
'452
1
Edwards Edwards
Edwards
^arben
T. L. R. 89
v.
;
145
60 Jenkins [1896] i Ch. 308 65 L. J. Ch. 222 73 L. T. 574 W. R. 407 744 J. P. 167; 44 Edwards v. Mallan [1908J t K. B. 1002 331 Edwards v. M. Ry. Co. (1880) 6 Q. B. D. 287 ; 50 L. J. Q. B. 2S1 ; 43 L. T. 55, 494 694 ; 29 W. R. 609 45 J. P. 374 Edwards . Moscley (1740) Willes, 192 551 811 Edwards . Omellhallum (1639) March, 64 Edwards v. Picard [1909] 2 K. B. 903 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 1108 loi L. T. 416 1057 25 T. L. R. 815 C. A 866 Edwards v. Slater (1665) Hardr. 410 Edwick V. Hawkes (i88i) 18 Ch. D. 199 50 L. J. Ch. 577 45 L. T. 168 29 383 W. R. 914 751 Edwin V. Thomas (1687) i Vern. 489 1218 Egleton's Case (1599) 2 Roll. Ab. 40 694 Egremont (Earl)?". Saul (1837) 6 A. & E. 924; 6 L. J. K. B. 205 32 W. R. Elderton, Re (1883) 25 Ch. D. 220 ; 53 L. J: Ch. 258 ; 50 L. T. 26 441 j27i 48 J. P. 341
; ; ;
:
....
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
CVlll
TABLE OF CASES
Positive, etc., Life Assur. Co. (1876) 45 L. J.
. .
Eley
V.
Ex. 451
.'
;
i
.
Ex. D. 88
.
.103
;
.
Ca. 454
,
48 L.
.
J. Ch. 811
. . . . 41 L. T. 289 ; 28 W. R. 54 790 Ellen 0. Topp (1851) 6 Ex. 424 ; 20 L. J. Ex. 241 ; 15 Jur. 451 Z17 EUenborouigh, Re [1903] i Ch. 697; 72 L. J. Ch. 218 ; 87 L. T. 714; 51 W. R. 315 1051, iioi EUesmere Brewery Co. v. Cooper [1896] i Q. B. 75 ; 65 L. J. Q. B. 173 ; 73 L. T. 567 ; 44 W. R. 254 56, 297 Elliot''s Trusts, Re (1873) L. R. 15 Eq. 194 ; 42 L. J. Ch. 289 ; zi W. R. 455 1413 Elliot o. Elliot (1677) 2 Cha. Ca. 231 813 EUiotson 0. Feetham (1835) 2 Bing. N'. C. 134 ; 2 Scott, 174 i HoBges, 259 394 Elliott v. Crutchley [1904] i K. B. 565 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 406 ; 90 L. T. 497 52 W. R. 499 ; 20 T. L. R. 286 C. A 132 Elliott V. Dearsley (1880) 16 Ch. D. 322 ; 44 L. T. 198 ; 29 W. R. 494-
..........
. ;
C.
A
0.
Elliott
Elliott (1841) 9
Elliott?).
Gurr (1812) 2
EUiott
30
V.
Elliott V.
Kemp
Ellis o. Ellis
ts.
24 R. 832 Ellis o. Goultcn [1893] : Q. B. 350 62 L. J. Q. B. 232 68 L. T. 144 41 W. R. 411 Ellis V. Loftus Iron Co. (1874) L. R. 10 C. P. 10 ; 44 L. J. C. P. 24 31 L. T. 483 23 W. R. 246 Ellis 1). Rogers-(i885) 29 Ch. D. 66r 186, 187, 53 L. T. 377 Ellis 1). Sheffield Gas Co. (1853)2 E. & B. 767 2 C. L. R. 249 23 L. J. Q. B. . . 42 18 Jur. 146 2 W. R. 19 EUistqn 11. Reacher [1908] 2 Ch. 665 78 L. J. Ch. 87 99 L. T. 701
; ;
Banyard (1911) 28 T. L.R. 122 56 Sol. Jo. 139 Emanuel (1876) i Ex. D. 157 ; 46 L. J. Ex. 25
; ;
&W.
23
11 L. J.
Ex. 3
1397 1269
ii77
Phill. 16
51
L. J. P. C.
45 L. T. 771
;
60,
239
78 L. T. 733
46
954 774
34 L. T. 553
W.
294
60
358 188
354
; .
C.
'
Elme
Elsee Elsee
o. V.
1).
Da
Costa (i79i)
Phill. 173
Elwes
V.
Gatward (i'793) 5 T. R. 143 Smith (1822) i Dow. & Ry.'97 2 Brigg Gas Co. (1886) 33 Ch. D. 562
;
....... ....
Chit.
.805
1338 221
304
489
55 L. J. Ch. 734
55 L. T. 831
cSc
35W.R. 192 & Chapter) v. Caldecot (1832) Cj. C. P. 131 (Dean & Chapter) v. Warren (1741) 2
.
424,623,777,921
8 Bing.
439
Atk. 189
.
.
....
.
M.
Sc.
633
J.
Ex. 71
2 L. T. 774
;
W. R.
.
665
Embrey
v.
Owen
ij Jur. 633. (1851) 6 Exch. 353 ; 20 L. J. Ex. 212 (1885) 16 Q. B. D. 354 ; 55 L. J. Q. B. 51 ; 53 L. T. 808 50 J. P. 228 C. ; 329,
370 327
Emmetto. Lyne (1805) I B. &P. N. R. 255 Smith (1848) 2 De G. & Sm. 722 Emuss
England
21
.
;
Cowley (1873) L. R. 8 Exch. 126 42 L. J. Ex. 80 28 L. T. 67 R. 337 417 Englehart n. Farrant [1897] i Q. B. 240 66 L. J. Q. B. 122 ; 75 L. T. 617 13 T. L. R. 81 ; 45 W. R. 179 327, 334
; ;
......
347, 506
440 1262
W.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
English
o.
;
cix
Metropolitan Water Board [1907] i K. B. 588 76 L. J. K. B. ; 96 L. T. 573 ; 71 J. P. 313 ; 23 T. L. R. 313 5 L. G. R. 384-403, 77' Englishman, The, and The Australia [1894] P. 239; [1895] P. 212; 64 L. J. Adm. 74 1 1 R. 757 ; 72 L. T. 203 43 W. R. 670 ; 7 Asp. M. C. ^5 334, 337 English, Scottish, etc., Investment Co. . Brunton [1892] 2 Q. B. 700 ; 62 L. J. Q. B. 136; 67L. T. 406; 41 W. R. 4R. 58C. A. 1048 133; Entickc. Carrington(i765)2Wils. 275 ; 19St.Tr. 1030 .326,340,380,439 Erlanger v. N. Sombrero Phosphate Co. (1878) L. R. 3 App. Ca. I2i8 iq L.T. 269; 26W. R. 65. 39 Errington, Re [1894] i Q. B. 11 10 R. 91. 69 L. T. 766 819 Erskine o. Adeane (1873) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 756 ; 42 L. 29 L. T. J. Ch. 835 234 ; 21 W. R. 802 784 Ertel Bieber v. Rio Tinto [1918] A. C. 260 ; 87 L. 118 L.T. J. K. B. 531 181 ; 23 Com. Cas. 243 ; 34 T. L. R. 208 H. L. (E.) 31A Erving v. Peters (1790) 3 T. R. 685 1369 EsdaUe o. Stephenson (1822) 6 Madd. 366 23 R. R. 248 . 119 Essex o. Essex (1855) 20 Beav. 442 267 Ethel's and Mitchell's and Butler's Contract [1901] i Ch. 945 70 L. J. Ch. 498 84 L. T. 459 ; 17 T. L. R. 392 555 Eustace, Re [1912] i Ch. 561 81 L. J. Ch. 529 106 L. T. 789 56 Sol. Jo. 468 1367 Euston (Earl) o. Seymour (1802) 2 Curt. 338 1243, 1244 Evans, Re ([1887) 34 Ch. D. 597 56 L. T. 768 35 W. R. 586-1C. A. 1416 Evans v. Bicknell (1801) 6 Ves. 174 ; 5 R. R. 245 761 Evans v. Brown (1842) 5 Beav. 114; 1 1 L. J. Ch. 349 ; 6 Jur. 381 1326, 1396 Evans v. Evans (1790) i Hagg. Con. 35 1188 Evans v. Evans [1892] 2 Ch. 173 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 456 67 L. T. 15 ; 40 W. R. 660 465 Evans v. Harlow (1844) 5 Q. B. 624 ; Dav. & M. 507 13 L. J, Q. B. 120
361
; ; ;
.
"
....
;
...
; .
. .
501 Ch. 452 79 L. J. Ch. 383 102 L. T. I 28 630, 631 v. Powis (1847) i Ex. 601 Jur. 1043 151 v. Rival Granite Quarries [1910] 2 K. B. 979 79 L. J. K. B. 970 1009 54 Sol. Jo. 580 ; 26 T. L. R. 509 C. A. Evans v. Walton (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 615 ; 36 L. J. C. P. 307 ; 7 L. T. 92 15 W. R. 1062 215, 475 Eve, Re [1909] i Ch. 796 78 L. J. Ch. 388 100 L. T. 874 1274 Evelyn, Ex parte (1833) 2 My. & K. 3 133') 1341 Evelyn v. Chichester (1765) 3 Burr. 1717 591 Evelyn v. Evelyn (1754) 3 Atk. 762 Amb. 191 1309 Everest v. Glyn (1815) 6 Taunt. 425 586, 591 Ewer V. Corbet (1723) 2 P. Wms. 148 1406 Ewer V. Moyle (1600) Cro. Eli2. 771 622 Ewing, In the Goods 0/(1881) 6 P. D. 19 50 L. J. P. II 44 L T. 278 ; 45 W. R. 474 1340 J. P. 376 ; 29 1 105 Ewing V. Orr-Ewing (1885) L. R. 10 App. Ca. 453 ; 53 L. T. 826 Ewing V. Wheatlev (18 14) 2 Hagg. Con. 175 1176 Exall V. Partridge' (1799) 8 T. R. 308 ; 3 Esp. 8 4 R. R. 656 103 Exchange Telegraph Co. v. Gregory [1896] i Q. B. 47 65 L. J, Q. B. 262 429 74 L. T. 83 60 J. P. 52C. A."^ 18 Exeter (Bishop) v. Marshall (1867) L. R. 3 H. L. 17 37 L. J. C. P-331
8 Jur. 571
v.
Levy
[1910]
L.T. 376
Exeter
Carrier's
724
Case
(n. d.),
quoted
in
Yorke
v.
Greenaugh (1703)
Ld,
Raym. 866
964
Digitized
by Microsoft
ex
TABLE OF CASES
I>AG
;
Eykyn'sTnists, i?(i877) 6 Ch. D. H5 37L. T. 261 Eyre, fie (1883) 49 L.T. 259. Eyre o. Dunsford (1801) I East, 318 Eyre v. Shaftesbury (1723) 2 P. Wms. 102 Eyres o. Faulkland (1697) I Salk. 231
. .
. . .
.......
,
.1102
871 541
665
1221 F. o. F. [1902] I Ch. 688; 71 L. J. Ch. 415 106 Fairclough v. Swan Brewery Co. [1912] A. C. 565 ; 81 L. J. P. C. 207 L. T. 931 28 T. L. R. 450 815,832 Fairfax v. Derby (1708) 2 Vern. 612 738 Fairhurst v. Liverpool Adelphi (1854) 23 L. J. Exch. 163 29 Fairlie v. Fenton (1870) L. R. 5 Exch. 169 39 L. J. Ex. 107 22 L. T. 373 18 W. R. 700 65 Fairman . Ives (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 642 ; i Dow. & Ry. 252 i Chit. 85 518 810 Fairtitle d. Mytton v. Gilbert (1787) 2 T. R. 169 ; i R. R. 455 Falcke v. Scottish Imperial Co. (1886) 34 Ch. D. 248 56 L. J. Ch. 707 ; 56 L. T. 220 317,325 35 W. R. 143C. A. Falvey v. Stanford (1874) L. R. 10 Q. B. 54 44 L. J. Q. B. 7 ; 31 L. T. 677 23 W. R. 162 372 Fane v. Fane [191 3] W. N. 61 57 Sol. Jo. 321 ; 29 T. L. R. 306 C. A. 877 Farhall v. Farhall (1871) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 123 41 L. J. Ch. 146 25 L. T. 1415 865 ; 20 W. R. 157 Farley v. Bonham (1861) 2 J. & H. 177 30 L. J. Ch. 239 ; 3 L. T. 806 ; 1319,1324 7 Jur. (N. S.) 232 ; 9 W. R. 299 Farmer v. Dean (1863) 32 Beav. 627 1 125 Farmour v. Brook (1596) 2 Bulstr. 195 697 Farnham, Re [1904] 2 Ch. 561 73 L. J. Ch. 667 ; 91 L. T. 781 2 L. G. R. 1050 C. A II20, 1130 Farquhar, In -the Goods of (1846) 4 Notes of Cases, 651 1256 Farquharson v. Cave (1846) 2 CoU. 356 1291 15 L. J. Ch. 137 ; 10 Jur. 63. Farquharson o. Floyer (1876) 3 Ch. D. 109 45 L. J. Ch. 750 35 L. T.
; ;
. .
...:..
; ; ; ; ;
1392 355 Farr o. Newman (1792) 4 T. R. 621 1349 Farrant v. Barnes (1862) 11 C. B. N. S. 553 ; 31 L. J. C. P. 137 ; 8 Jur. (N. S.) 868 259, 331 Farrar v. Beswick (1836) i M. & W. 682, 688 ; i Tyr. & G. 1053 ; 5 L. J. Ex. 225 ; I M. & Rob. 527 418 Farrer v. Lacy (1883) 25 Ch. D. 636 53 L. J. Ch. 569 50 L. T. 121 ; 32 R. 196 W. 820 Farrer v. Nelson (1885) 15 Q. B. D. 258 ; 54 L. J. Q. B. 385 ; 52 L. T. 786 ; . 360, 724 49 J- P- 725 ; 33 W. R. 800 ., Farrer v. St. Catherine's College (1873) L. R. 16 Eq. 19 ; 42 L. J. Ch. 809 28 L. T. 800 ; 21 W. R. 643 1251 Farrington . Knightley (1719) I P. Wms. 544 1329 Farrow v. Wilson (1869) L. R. 4 C. P. 744 38 L. J. C. P. 326 20 L. T. 810 18W. R. 43 130,214 Faulkner o. Daniel (1843) 3 Hare, 199 10 L. J. Ch. 33 8 Jur. 29 1078 Faulkner B. Lowe (1848) 2 Ex. 595. 95,103 Fauntleroy v. Beebe [191 1] 2 Ch. 257 ; 80 L. J. Ch. 654 104 L. T. 704 5S Sol. Jo. 497-^C- A 1360 Faux, Re [1915] W. N. 135 ; 113 L. T. 81 ; 31 T. L. R. 289 ; 59 Sol. Jo.
. . . . . .
,
'
..... ......
; ; ;
. .
457 Favenc 0. Bennett (1809) II East, 36 Faviell o. Eastern Cos^ Ry. Co. (1848) 2 -Exch. 344;
.
.
....
&
L. 54
.
1287 114
53
6 D.
17
.
L. J. Ex. 223
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Fawcet v. Bowers (1693) i Ed. 287 Fawcet v. Lowther (1751) 2 Ves. Sen. 300 Fawcett v. Cash (1834) 5 B. & Ad. 904;
.
cxi
PAGE
.815
113
i R. & M. 132 4 L. J. (0. S.) Ch. 64 8 L. J. 27 R. R. 260 39 Fay V. Prentice (1845) i C. B. 829 ; 14 L. J. C. P. 298 ; 9 Jur. 877 381, 391 Fear v. Vickers (1911) 27 T. L. R. 558 ; 55 Sol. Jo. 688 C. A. 771 Fechter v. Montgomery (1863) 33 Beav. 22 222 Feistel v. King's College, Cambridge (1847) ' Beav. 491 16 L. J. Ch. 339 II Jur. 506 999 Fell . Biddolph (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 701 44 L. J. C. P. 402 ; 32 L. T. 864 1289 23 W. R. 913 Fell V. Whittaker (1871) L. R. 7 Q. B. 120 41 L. J. Q. B. 78 25 L. T. 880 ; 20 W. R. 317 533 Fells V. Read (1796) 3 Ves. Jun. 71 930 Fenn v. Harrison (1790) 3 T. R. 757 59 Fennell v. Ridler (1826) 5 B. & C. 406 8 D. & R. 204 4 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. 69 207 29 R. R. 278 Fenton v. Blythe (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 417 ; 59 L. J. Q. B. 589 ; 63 L. T. 453 39W. R. 79 951 Fenton v. Thorley [1903] A. C. 443 ; 72 L. J. K. B. 787 ; 89 L. T. 314 52 W. R. 81 456 Ferguson-Davle v. Ferguson-Davie (1890) 15 P. D. 109 59 L. J. P. 70 ; 62 T. 703 1238 L. 116 Fergusson . Fyffe (1841) 8 CI. & F. 121 Fermiers. Maund (1683) I Rep. in Ch. 116 790 11 Jur. Fessard v. Mugnier (1865) 18 C. B. N. S. 286 34 L. J. C. P. 126 Ill (N. S.)283; II L. T, 635 12 M. & W. 279 Festing v. Allen (1842-4) 5 Ha. 573 13 L. J. Ex. 74 658,
Fawcett
v.
Whitehouse (1829)
;
...........
. .
N.
& M.
177;
...........
; ; ; ; : ;
.....
. .
"
......
; ;
663, 1271
Fewster,
Re {1901]
Ch. 447
70 L.
;
J.
Ch. 254
;
84 L. T. 45
17 T. L. R.
.
205 Ffinch V.
Field
V.
1 Field V. Carr (1828) 5 Bing. 13 ; 2 M. & P. 46 ; 6 L. J. (0. S.) C. P. 203 . 14 1341 Fielder 11. Hanger (1832) 3 Hagg. Ecc. 769 . 511 Fielding v. Thomas [1896] A. C. 600 ; 65 L. J. P. C. 103 ; 75 L. T. 216 Filburn v. People's Palace Co. (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 258 ; 59 L. J. Q. B. 471 ; 361,453 38 W.R. 706; 55 J. P. 181 C. A . 776 Q- B. 347 ; 17 L. J. Q. B. 89 ; 12 Jur. 202 Filliter v. Phippard (1847) 762 Finch's (Sir Moyle) Case ^1590) 2 Leon. 134 . . . . 691, 849, 850 Finch's (Sir Moyle) Case (1606) 6 Rep. 63 a Finch I-. Brook (1834) i Scott, 70 ; 2 Scott, 511 ; i Bing. (N. C.) 253 ; 2 107 Hodges, 97 ; 4 L. J. C. P. I 1149 Fincho. Winchelsea (Earl) (1715) I P. Wms. 280 Findon 0. Parker (1843) 11 M. & W. 675 ; 12 L. J. Ex. 444 ; 7 Jur. 903.. .496, 498 Fine Art Society v. Union Bank (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 705 ; 56 L. J. Q. B. 70 ; . 55 L. T. 536 ; 35 W. R. 114 ; 51 J- P- 69 C- A. Finlay v. Chirney (1888) 57 L. J. Q. B. 247 ; 20 Q. B. D. 494 ; 58 L. T.
4 Jur. 103
...........
; ; ;
144 1249
1
84
"
.416
36
31;
W.
R. 534
92
v.
Humphreys
52 J- P- 324 C. ; (1886) 18 Q. B. D. 54
. . .
111,362
;
56 L. J. Q. B. 57
56 L. T.
61
W.R.
Firebrass
v.
5*5
Digitized
by Microsoft
CXll
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE Re
Firth,
56 Sol. Jo. [1912] i Ch. 806 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 539 ; 106 L. T. 865 . 1108, IIIO 467 ; z8 T. L. R. 378 Firth o. Bowling Iron Co. (1878) 3 C. P. D. 254; 47 L. J.- C. P- 358 ; 38
.
L. T. 568 ; 26 W. R. 558 783 Fischer v. Kamala Naicker (i860) 8 Moo. Ind. App. 187 498 Fish, Re [1893] ^ C^i- 4^3 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 977 ; 69 L. T. 233 ; 2 R, 467- -C. A, 141 Fish o. Ke^y (1864) 17 G. B. N. S, 194 230 Fisher o. Bristow (1779) i Doug. 215 49 Fisher v. Prowse (1862) 2 B. & S. 770 ; 31 L. J. Q. B. 212 ; 8 Jur. (N. S, i2o8;.6L. T. 7,11403 Fisher o. Smith (1879) L. R. 4 App. Ca. i ; 48 L. J. Ex. 4:1 ; 39 L. T. 430 ; 27 W. R. 113 964, 965 Fisher v. Wigg (1700) i P. Wms. 14 590, 666 Fisher s. Young (1614) 2 Bulstr. 268 925 Fitch V. Rawling (1795) 2 H. Bl. 393 ; 3 R. R. 425 . 679. 744, 746 Fitch o. Stuckley (1594) 4 Rep. 23 a 653 Fitch V. Sutton (1804) 5 East, 230 ; i Smith, 415 95 Fitch . ^eber (1848) 6 Ha. 145 ; 17 L. J. Ch. 361 ; 12 Jur. 645 1361 Fitzgerald, Re [1904] i Ch. 573 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 436 ; 90 L. T. 266 jz W. R1051 432 ; 20 T. L. R, 332C. Fitzgerald c. Firbank [1897] 2 Ch. 96 ; 66 L. J. Ch. 529 ; 76 L. T. 584
. .
... ....
.
C. A.
'
'Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald (1874) L. R. 3 P. 31 L. T. 270 ; ,22 W. R. 267 Fitzgerald v. North'cote (1865) 4 F. & F. 656
Fitzgerald's Trustees
&
M. 136
43 L. J. P.
&
M.
13
:i9i 1225
v. MeUersh [1892] 1 Ch. 385 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 231 ; 66 L. T. 178; 40W. R. 251 829 Fitzhardinge (Lord) v. Purcell [1908] 2 Ch. 139 ; 77 L. J. Ch. 529 ; 99 L. T. 24T. L. R. 564. . . 680,715,745 154; 7aJ-P-276; Fitzjohn v. Mackinder (1861) 9 C. B. N. S. 505 ; 30 L. J. C. P. 257 ; 7 Jur.
. .
4 L. T. 149
W.
;
Fitzroy
v.
R. 477 74 L. J. K. B. 829
W.
R. 17; 21 T. L. R. 612
Fitzwalter's (Lord) Case (1764) 1 Mod. 105 Fitz Williams o. Kelly (1852) 10 Ha. 266; 22 L. J. Ch.
....
i
93 L. T. 499
491, 493 54
496
701
1016; 17 Jur.
1395
;
249 Flack B. Downing College (1853) 13 C. 229 17 Jur. 697 ; I W. R. 453 Flamank, Re (1889) 40 Ch. D. 461 ; W. R. 502 Flanders v. Clarke (1747) 3 Atk. 509 Flartyc. Odium (1790) 3 T. R. 681 Fleet V. Metropolitan Asylums Board Fleetwood's Case (1608) 8 Rep. 171 a Fleetwood, iJe (1880) 15 Ch. D. 594 Fleetwood v. Curley (1619) Hob. 267
; ;
B. 945
C. L.
R. 692
;
22 L.
J. C.
-iyS
P
665
58 L. J. Ch. 518
i
60 L. T.
37
1183 1335
Ves. Sen. 9.
(1886) 2 T. L. R. 361
.....
; ;
999 400
.
863 1259
148
5S
Prentis [1892] 2 Ch. 428
.
;
61 L. J. Ch. 705 67 L. T. 107 57 G. M. & G. 976 ; 22 L. J. Ch. 886 (1853) 3 1393 v. Dollar (1889) 23 Q. B. D. 388 L. J. Q. B. 548 61 L. T. 230 58 II, 520 37 W. R. 684 Fleming I'. Hislop (1886) L. R. 11 App. Cas. 686H. L. (Sc.) 394 Fleming v. Newton (1848) 1 H. L. C. 363 515 Fletcher, Re (1888) 38 Ch. D. 373 57 L. J. Ch. 1032 59 L. T. 313 ; 36 W. R. 841 1285
Flegg
V.
Fleming Fleming
Buchanan
De
...
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Fletchers. Ashburner (1779)
i
cxiii
PAGE
Bro. C. C. 497
;
L. C. (8th ed.)
347
Fletcher Fletcher Fletcher
v.
1357
J. P. Ill
v. v.
678; 7W.JI. 187 438 v. Rylands (1868) L. R. 3 H. L. C. 330 37 L. J. Ex. 161 ; L. R. i Exch. 280 358j 404 Flight V. Bolland (1828) 4 Russ. 298 28 R. R. lot 128 Flight V. Leman (1843) 4 Q- B. 883 ; Dav. & M. 67 ; 12 L. J. Q. B. 353 ; 7 Jur. 557 496 Fhnt V. Pike (1825) 4 B. & C. 473 6 Dow. & Ry. 528 ; 3 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 272 512 Florence v. Jenings (1857) 2 C. B. N. S. 454 26 L. J. C. P. 274 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.)772 1,8 Flory V. Denny (1852) 7 Exch. 581 21 L. J. Ex. 223 940, 950 Flower and Metropolitan Board of Works, Re (1884) 27 Ch. D. 592; 53 L. J. Ch. 955 51 L. T. 257 32 W. R. loii 190, 1132 Flower o. Pritchard (1909) 53 Sol. Jo. 178 818 Fludyer, Re [1898] 2 Ch. 562 67 L. J. Ch. 620 ; 79 L. T. 298 ; 47 W. R. 5 1378, 1380 Flureau 0. Thornhill (1776) 2 Wm. Bl. 1078 121 Foakes s. Beer (1884) 9 App. Cas. 605 151,152 Foden v. Foden [1894] P. 307 ; 63 L. J. P. 163 ; 71 L. T. 279 ; 42 W. R. . 1200 689 ; 6 R. 633 C. A. Foley's Charity v. Dudley Corporation [1910] i K. B. 317 ; 79 L. J. K. B. 140 ; 102 L. T. I . 738 74 J. P. 41 i 8 L. G. R. 320 C. A. Foley V. Burnell (1783) i Bro. C. C. 274 ; 4 Bro. P. C. 319 928, 1149 Foley V. Hill (1848) 2 H. L. C. 28 202 Foord o. Morley (1859) I Fost. & F. 496. 207 Foordo. Noll(i842)2D. (N. S.) 617; 12 L. J. C. P. 2 106 Forbes v. Samuel [1913] 3 K. B. 706 ; 82 L. J. K. B. 1135 109 L. T. 599 ; . 29 T. L. R. 544 990 Force v. Warren (1864) 15 C. B. N. S. 806 527 Ford, Re [1902] 2 Ch. 605 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 778 ; 87 L. T. 113 ; 51 W. R. 20 18 T. L. R. 809C. A 1311,1336 Ford V. Batley (1853) 17 Beav. 303 ; 23 L. J. Ch. 225 . 995 Ford V. De Pontes (1861) 30 Beav. 572 ; 31 L. J. Ch. 185 5 L. T. 515 ; 8 10 W. R. 69 Jur. (N. S.) 323 1251 Ford o. Stier [1896] P. I ; 73 L. T. 632 1175 Fords. Tynte (1864) 2De G. J. cfe S. 127 792 Fordham c. Wallis (1853) 10 Ha. 217; 22 L. J. Ch. 548; 17 Jur. 228; i W. R. 118 1385 Fores ti. Wilson (1791) Peakej^7 465, 468, 474 Forget V. Ostigny [1895] A. C. 318 ; 64 L. J. P. C. 62 72 L. T. 399 ; 43 W. R. 590 309, 313 Forshaw o. Higginson (1855) 20 Beav. 485 1109 Forster o. Baker [1910] 2 K. B. 636 ; 79 L. J. K. B. 664 102 L. T. 522 ; 26 T. L. R. 421 C. A. 818, 1047, i93 Forster o. Hale (1798) 3 Yes. 696 ; (1800) 5 Ves. 308 4 R. R. 128. .99, 267, iioo Forster 0. Lawson (1826) 3 Bing. 452 ; 11 Moore, 360 ; 4 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 148 524 Forster v. Patterson (i88i) 17 Ch. D. 132 50 L. J. Ch. 603 ; 44 L. T. 465 ; . 29 W. R. 463 77, 847
Fletcher
; ;
Birkenhead Corp. [1907] i K. B. 205 ; 76 L. J. K. B. 218 71 ; 96 L. T. 287 ; 23 T. L. R. 195 ; 5 L. G. R. 293 C. A. Fletcher (1844) 4 Hare, 67 14 L. J. Ch. 66 8 Jur. 1040 Fletcher (1859) i E. & E. 420 ; 28 L. J. Q. B. 134 ; 5 Jur. (N. S.)
; . : ; .
345 97
....
.
.
...'...
. . . .
...... ......
. . . .
...... ....
;
...
;
......
; ; ; .
C.I..
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxiv
TABLE OF CASES
605 Fort V. Ward (1598) Moore, 667 * Forth 0. Chapman (1720) i P. Wms. 663 1273 Forth V. Simpson (1849) 13 Q. B. 680 ; 18 L. J. Q. B. 263 964 13 Jur. 1024 . Fossett V. Breer (1673) 3 Keb. 59 2 Lev. 63 474, 475 Foster, In the Goods 0/(1871) L. R. 2 P. & M. 304 ; 41 L. J. P. 18 25 L. T. 1332 763 20 W. R. 302 Foster V. Sates (1843) 12 M. & W. 226 13 L. J. Ex. 88 ; 7 Jur. 1093 I D. & L. 400 1347, 1348 Foster v. Charles (1830) 7 Bing. 105 540 Foster o. Dawber (1851) 6 Ex. 839 20 L. J. Ex. 385 75, 144, 145 Foster o. Foster (1700) 2 Vern. 386 739 Foster . Foster (1875) i Ch. D. 588 ; 45 L. J. Ch. 301 1360 24 W. R. 185 20 L. T. Foster o. Mackinnon {1869) L. R. 4 C. P. 704 38 L. J. C. P. 310 887; 17W. R. 1105 34,37 Foster v. Mentor Life Assurance Co. (1854) 3 El. & BL 48 ; 2 C. L. R. 1404 loi 18 Jur. 827 '. 23 L. J. Q. B. 145 Foster o. Pearson (1834) i C. M. & R. 849 5 Tyr. 255 4 L. J. Ex. 120 230 Foster o. Stewart (1814) 3 M. & S. 191 15 R. R. 459 217,476 Foster v. Warblington Urban Council [1906J i K. B. 648 ; 75 L. J. K. B. 514 ; 70 J. P. 233 54 W. R. 575 94 L. T. 876 22 T. L. R. 421 ; 4 L. G. R.
;
......
....
; ; . . ;
PAGE
....... .......
; . ; ; ; ;
.
394 v. Wright (1878) 4 C. P. D. 438 49 L. J. C. P. 97 44 J. P. 7- -72, 77% 779 Fotherby v. Metro. Ry. Co. (1866) L. R. 2 C. P. 194 36 L. J. C. P. 88 12 Jur. (N. S.) 1005; 15 L. T. 243; 15 W. R. 112 529 Fothergill v. Phillips (1871) 52 L. J. Ch. 833 24 Ch. D. 439 ; 49 L. T. 5 ;
Foster
; ; ; ; ; ;
735 C. A
'
126 32 W. R. 6 C. A i D. (N. S.) 86 ; 10 L. Fouldes V. WiUoughby (1841) 8 M. & W. 540 J. Ex. 407. 417 364 S Jur. 534 Foulger o. Newcomb (1867) L. R. 2 Ex. 327 ; 36 L. J. Ex. 169 ; 16 L. T. 595 ; 15 W. R. 1181 504 Foveaux, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 501 ; 64 L. J. Ch. 856 73 L. T. 202 43 W. R. 661 ; 13 R. 730 916 Fowkes V. Pascoe (1875) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 343 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 367 32 L. T. 813,1103 545 23 W. R. 538 Fowler V. Hollins (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 629 ; 44 L. J. Q. B. 169 ; 33 L. T. 73 417 Fowler V. Sanders (1617) Cro. Jac. 446 395 Fox's (Edward) Case (i 610) 8 Rep. 93 b, 94 a 609,616 Fox 0. Buckley (1876) 3 Ch. D. 508 25 W. R. 170 C. A. U43 Fox V. Chester (Bishop) (1829) 6 Bing. i ; i Dow. & CI. 416 ; 3 Bligh (N. S.) 123 34 R. R. 23 727 Fox c. Fisher (1819) 3 B. & Aid. 135 22 R. R. 324 1350 Fox V. Gaunt (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 798 i L. J. K. B. 198 437, 438 Fox 1). Mackreth (1788) 2 Cox, 321 ; 2 Bro. C. C. 400 2 R. R. 5; 39, 1125
; ; ; ; ;
.......
. . . .
.
....
. . . .
. . .
Fox
V.
Foxall 0. Venables (1590) Cro.'Eliz. 180 746 Foxley's Case (1601) 5 Rep. 109 a ; Moore, 572 ; Cro. Eliz. 69J . 698, 849 Foxwist . Tremain (1669) 1 Mod. 47 . . . . .1331 Fkmpton v. Stephens (1882) 21 Ch. D. 164 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 562 ; 46 L. T. 617 ; . . . . . . 30 W. R. 726 1323 France 0. Clark (1883) 22 Ch. D. 830 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 362 ; 48 L. T. 185 ; 31 W. R. 374 ; affirmed (1884) 26 Ch. D. 257 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 585 ; 50 L. T. i; 32 W. R. 466^C. A. . . 956,1005 Frances v. Frances (1854) 3 De G. M. & G. 108 . 1147 Francis v. Cockerell (1870) L. R. 5 Q. B. 501 ; 10 B. & S. 850 ; 39 L. J. Q. B. 291 ; 23 L. T. 466 ; j8 W, R. 1205 . . . . 332, 355
. . . . . . . . . . . .
.
...... ......
;
795
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Hayward (1882) 22 Ch. D. 177 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 291 : 48 L. T. 207 ^\' ^.'\ \ 47 J. P. 517; 31 W.R. 488 Frankenbnrg v. Great Horseless, &c., Co. [1900] i Q. B. 504 ; 6g L. J. Q. B. 147 ; 81 L. T. 684 ; 7 Manson, 349 C. A
Franas
v.
cxv
PAGE
..".'.
;
713
29 Cooper (1799) 4 Vcs. 763 1382 Fraser, Re [1904] i Ch. 726 ; 73 L. 52 W. R. 516 J. Ch. 481 ; 91 L. T. 48 20T. L. R. 414C. A 1267,1396 Fraser v. Balfour (1917) 34 T. L. R. 134; (19x8) 87 L. J. K. B. ni6; 62 Sol. Jo. 680 34 T. L. R. 502 H. L. (E.) 340, 342 Fraser o. Hamilton (1917) 33 T. L. R. 431 C. A 342 Fraser v. Mason (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 574 52 L. J. Q. B. 643 49 L. T. 761 32 W. R. 421 591 Fraser v. Pendlebuty (1861) 31 L. J. C. P. i ; 10 W. R. 104 319, 810 Frazeri;. Hatton (1857) 2 C. B. N. S. 512 ; 26 L. J. C. P. 226 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 694 ; 5 W. R. 632 95 Frearson v. Low (1878) 9 Ch. D. 48 27 W. R. 183 1017
Franklin v. Hosier (1821) 4 B. & Aid. 341 ; 23 R. R. 305 Franklin c. Neate (1844) 13 M. & W. 481 14 L. J. Ex. 59 Franks, a;pae(i83i) 7 Bing. 762; I M. & S. C. I
.
337
.
.
Franks
.....957
.
964
o.
....
;
Frederick (1721) i P. Wms. 710 1218 (i 646) Sid. 458 642,643 v. Pope (1869) L. R. 9 Eq. 206 21 L. T. 816 18 39 L. J. Ch. 148 W. R. 399 ; (1870) L. R. 5 Ch. App." 538 ; 39 L. J. Ch. 689 ; 21 L. T. 816; 18 W. R. 906 C. A 1060,1061,1063 Freeman v. Read (1863) 4 B. & S. 174 32 L. J. M. C. 226 10 Jur. (N. S.) 1 1 W. R. 802 149 8 L. T. 458 70 Freeth v. Burr (1874) 43 L. J. C. P. 91 ; L. R. 9 C. P. 208 ; 29 L. T. 773 22 W. R. 370 146, 147, 148 Freman, Be (1898) i Ch. 28 67 L. J. Ch. 14 77 L. T. 460 1119, 1130 Freme, Re [1894] l Ch. i 63 L. J. Ch. 139 ; 69 L. T. 613 42 W. R. 119 ; 7 R. I C. A 883 French i: French (1841) 2 Man. & G. 644 3 Scott (N. R.) 121 10 I-. J. C. P. Frederick
b.
Freeman Freeman
?).
Barnes
...... ......
; ; ; ; . .
291
&
War. 269
i
Con.
&
;
.
L. 559
Ir.
Eq. R.
139
;
Ch. 713
-.
73 L. J. Ch. 405
."
.
90
.
553
Freshfield v.
Frisby,
Re
(1842) 11 L. J. (N. S.) Exch. 193 ; 9 M. & W. 404 (1889) 43 Ch. D. 106 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 94 ; 61 L. T. 632 ; 38
Reed
96
76 1417
961
W.
.
R.
65
Ch. 342 71 L. J. Ch. 199 ; 86 L. T. 212 . 8 Jur. (N. S.) Frith . Forbes (i86z) 4 De G. F. & J. 409 ; 32 L. J. Ch. 10 . 1113 ; II W. R. 14 Fritz . Hobson (1880) 14 Ch. D. 542 49 L. J. Ch. 735 42 L. T. 677 ; 28 W. R. 722 62 L. T. 25 ; 38 W. R. Frost, Re (1889) 43 Ch. D. 2465 59 L. J. Ch. 118
Frith,
Re
[1902]
-773
264
Frost
.
662, 1075
Knight (1872) 41
R. 471
.
L. J.
Ex. 78
L. R. 7 Ex. iii
26 L. T. 77
.
20
.
W.
Frost V. London Joint Stock Bank (1906) 22 T. L. R. 760 C. A. Fry, Re [1912] 2 Ch. 86; 81 L. J. Ch. 640; 106 L. T. 999; 56 Sol. Jo. 518 Fry V. Fry (1859) 27 Beav. 144 28 L. J. Ch. 593 5 Jur. (N. S.) 1047 Fry V. Lane (1889) 40 Ch. D. 312 : 58 L. J. Ch. 113 60 L. T. 12 37 W. R.
120,122,124,147
508
..
1397 1119
37
13s
7.2
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxvi
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Smellie [1912] 3 K. g. 282
. ;
Fry
V.
81 L. J. K. B. 1003
106 L. T.
4041006
;
C. A.
'
57 L. J. Ch. 862
58 L. T. 872
36
1388 R. 631 L. R. 4 C. P. v. Montis (1868) L. R. 3 C. P. 268 ; 38 L. J. C. P. 95 416,420 93; I9,L. T. 364; i7W;-R.2o8 12 Jur. (N. S.) Fuller w. Chamier (1866) L. R. 2 Eq. 682 35 L. J. Ch. 772 660 642; 14W. R. 913 1005 Fuller o. Glyn Mills [1914] 2 K. B. 168 ; 30 T. L. R. 162 58 Sol. Jo. 235 1240 Fuller V. Hooper (1750) 2 Ves. Sen. 242 Fuller V. Redman (No. 2) (1859) 26 Beav. 614 1383 Fulwood's Case (1591) 4 Rep. 64 b 976 1176 Fulwood's (Lady) Case (1637) Cro. Car. 488 C. A. Furniss o. Cambridge Daily News, Ltd. (1907) 23 T. L. R. 705 513 Furnival 0. Crew (1744) 3 Atk. 83 617 1220 Fynn, Re (1848) 2 De G. & S. 457 ; 13 Jur. 483
.
W.
Fuentes
......
,
.....
.
1 0. w. G. (1908) 25 T. L. R. 328 C. A 177 Gabriel v. Churchill, etc. [1914] 3 K. B. 1272 ; 84 L. J. K. B. 233 ; 19 Com. L. T. 933 ; 58 SoJ. Jo. 740 ; 30 T. L. R. 658 C. A. 60, 236 ;Cas. 411 ; Gabriel v. Dresser (1^55) 15 C. B. 622 ; 3 C. L. R. 415 ; 24 L. J. C. P. 81 ; 3
W.
Gadd
V.
R. 236
151
Houghton
R. 975
o.
(1876)
Ex. D. 357
;
46 L.
J.
Ex. 71
;
35 L. T. 222
.
24
.
;
W. W.
Gage
o.
62
421
Gadsden
2 C. L. R. 1063
. . .
23 L. J. Ex. 134
. . .
R. 241
. .
Smith (1613) Godb. 209 Galbraith v. Poynton [1905] 2 K. B. 258 74 L. J. K. B. 649 Gale V. Gale (1877) 6 Ch. D. 144 46 L. J. Ch. 809 36 L. T. 690 . 772 Gallwey v. Marshall (1853) 9 Exch. 294 2 C. L. R. 399 23 L.
; ; ; .
. . ;
790,791
591, 592
25
W.
R.
104
W.
o.
R. 106
Galton
Hancock
Game, Re
. 96 L. T. 145 [1907] i ; Gardiner, In the Goods 0/(1884) 9 P- D. 66 ; 53 L. J. P. 31 ; 48 J. P. 456'; 32 W. R. 756 1332 Gardiner v. Courthope (i886) 12 P. D. 14 56 L. J. P. 55 ; 57 L. T. 280 50 J. P. 791 ; 35 W. R. 352 1251 Gardner o. Gardner (1877) L. R. 2 App. Cas. 723 . 1205,1207 Gardner 0. Hodgson's Brewery [1903] A. C. 229 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 558 ; 88 L. T. 698; 52 W. R. 17; 19T. L. R. 458 849 Gardner v. L. C. & D. Ry. (1866) L. R. 2 Ch. App. 201 ; 36 L. J. Ch. 323 ; 15 L. T. 552; 15 W. R. 324 Garfitt V. Allen (1888) 37 Ch. D. 48 57 L. J. Ch. 420 ; 57 L. T. 848 ; 36
.
.......
;
J.
Ex. 78
...
...
, . .
.ion
820 384 Garland, i'K^ane (1804) 10 Ves. no; i Smith, 220 7 R. R. 352. 1405, 1416, 1417 Garland v. Mead (1871) L. R. 6 Q. B. 441 40 L. J. Q. B. 179 24 L. T. 421 19W. R. nje 587 Garner i>. Hannyngton (1836) 22 Beav. 627 574 Garrard, Re [1907] i Ch. 382 ; 76 L. Ch. 240; 76 L. T. 357; 23 T. L. R. J. 256 1099 Garrard v. Garrard (1871) 2 P. & M. 238 25 L. T. 162 19 W. R. 569 1339 Garrardzi. Tuck (1849) 8 C. B. 231 18 L. J. C. P. 338 13 Jur. 871. 643 Garret . Taylor (1620) Cro. Jac. 567 2 RoUe, 162 474, 48
.
.
>
Salk. 221
....... ......
; ; ; ; ; ;
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Garrick
CXVll
156 35 T. L. R. 129 108 Garter o. Dee (1671) i Freem. K. B. 13 1351 Garth v. Cotton (1750) i Ves. Sen. 545 66g Garton v. Bristol & Exeter Ry. Co. (1861) i.B. & S. 112; 30 L. Q. B J. 273 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 1234 9 W. R. 734 249 Gaskell's and Walters' Contract [lopei 2 Ch. i 7c L. T. Ch. ;o3 : 04. L. T, 658 22 T. L. R. 454-C. A. 918 Gasquoine, Re [1894] l Ch. 470 ; 63 L. 70 L. T. 196 7 R. 449 1422 J. Ch. 377 Gatayes v. Flather (1865) 34 Beav. 387 186 Gatenbyn. Morgan (1876) I Q. B. D. 685 556 Gateward's Case (1607) 6 Rep. 59 b 680, 745 Gathercole . Miall (1846) 15 M. & W. 319 10 Jur. 337 15 L. J. Ex. 179 526 Gattward v. Knee [1902] P. 99 71 L. J. P. 34 86 L. T. 119 18 T. L. R.
; . ; ; . .
Taylor (i860) 29 Beav. 79 30 L. J. Ch. 211 ; 7 Tur. (N. S.) 116 9W. R. 181 Garside, Re (1918) 53 L. W. N. 378 63 Sol. To J. 428 ; 146 L. T. Jo. no ''
v.
;
3L. T. 460;
I09I
... ...
: . . ; ;
. .
63
Gaussen Gautret
17;
v.
v.
Gay
B.
C.
1243 240
App. 133
Tr. 431
Sw.
&
Geanes Gearns
86
v.
v.
;
Portman (1594) Cro. Ehz. 314 Baker (1875) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 355
i
......
;
;
12
W. R.
1258 647
44 L.
;
J.
Ch. 334
;
Geary
v.
Sid.
346
2 Keb. 148
Lev. 202
654, 762 York. Ry. Co. (i860) 6 H. & N. 2n 30 L. J. Ex. 11 ; 6 Jur. (N. S.) 1118; 3 L. T. 328; 9W. R. 103 . 122 Geere v. Burkensham (1682) 3 Lev. 85 . 700 Geipel v. Smith (1872) 41 L. J. Q. B. 153 L. R. 7 Q. B. 404 ; 26 L. T. 361 20 W. R. 332 I Asp. M. C. 268 132 General Accident Assurance Corporation v. Noel [1902] i K. B. 377 ; 71 L. J. K. B. 236 86 L. T. 555 50 W. R. 381 139 General Auction Co. 0. Smith [1891] 3 Ch. 432 60 L. J. Ch. 723 65 L. T. 188 40 W. R. 106 1008 General Finance Co. u. Liberator Society (1878) 10 Ch. D. 15 39 L. T. 600 27W. R. 210 388,811 General Provident Co., iie (1869) 38 L. J. Ch. 320; 17 W. R. 514 . 1008 Genner . Sparks (1704) 6 Mod. 173; Salk. 79. . 432 George, Re (1877) 5 Ch. D. 837 ; 47 L. J. Ch. 118 26 W. R. 37 L. T. 204 65C- A 1135 . George v. Bank of England (18 19) 7 Price, 651 . 1103 George v. Chambers (1843) 11 M. & W. 149 2 D. (N. S.) 783 12 L. J. M. C. 413 94 7 Jur. 836 18 George v. Skivington (1869) L. R. 5 Ex. i 39 L. J. Ex. 8 21 L. T. 495 W. R. 118 331 . Gerard f. Dickenson (1590) 4 Co. Rep. 18 a 406 i C. L. R. 868 ; 22 L. Gerhard v. Bates (1855) 2 E. & B. 488 J. Q. B. 364 536 17 Jur. 1097; I W. R. 383 Gerrard v. Butler (1855) 20 Beav. 541 876 61 L. J. Q. B. 487 ; 67 L. T. 204 . Gerrard v. Clowes [1892] 2 Q. B. ii 988 6g& Gery v. Redman (1875) I Q. B. D. 161 45 L. J. Q. B. 267 24 W. R. 270
Gee
V.
Lane.
&
......
; . .
. ;
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxviii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
"
Gestetner,
156 C. A 1029 Gibbon, Re [1909] i Ch. 367 100 L. T. 231 78 L. J. Ch. 264 53 Sol. Jo. ^77 553 Gibbons 0. Pepper (1694) 4 Mod. 405 407 Gibbs 0. Cruikshank (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 454 28 L. T. 104 42 L. J. C. P. 21 W. R. 734 123, 413 273 Gibbs . Fremont (1853) 9 Exch. 25; 22 L. J. Ex. 302; 17 Jur. 820; i W, R. 482 125 Giblan v. National Labourers' Union [1903] 2 K. B. 600 72 L. J. K. B. 907 89 L. T. 386 479,481,484 Gibson o. Bott (1802) 7 Ves. 89 6 R. R. 87 1270 Gibson v. Seagrim (1855) 20 Beav. 741 836 Gibson -0. Winter (1838) 5 B. & Ad. 102 2 N. & M. (K. B.) 737 . 65 Gidley o. Palmerston (Lord) (1822) 2 B. & B. 275 7 Moore, 91 ; 21 R. R. 668 998 Gifford, a;^ae (1802) 6 Ves. 805 6 R. R. 53 297 Gilbert, Re [1898] i Q. B. 282 ; 67 L. J. Q. B. 229 ; 77 L. T. 775 46 W. R. 1380 351; 14T. L. R. 125; 4 Manson, 337 Gilbert v. Schwenk (1845) '4 M- ^ W. 488 14 L. J. Ex. 31759 Jur. 693 441, 475, 1226 Gilbert w. Witty (162 1 ) Cro. Jac. 655 , 655 Gilbertson v. Richardson (1848) 5 C. B. 502 12 Jur. 292 17 L. J. C, P. ii2 413 Gilbey v. Rush [1906] i Ch. 11 75 L. J. Ch. 32 93 L. T. 616 ; 54 W. R. . 883, 888 71 ; 22 T. L. R. 23 Gilding v. Eyre (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 592 31 L. J. C. P. 174 ; 5 L. T. 136 ; 494 9 W. R. 946 Giles, Re (1886) 55 L. J. Ch. 695 .1113 55 L. T. 51 34 W, R. 712 Giles, Re [1896] i Ch. 956 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 419 74 L. T. 21 ; 44 W. R. 283 1381 Giles V. Grover (1832) 6 Bligh (N. S.) 277 2 M. & Sc. 197 9 Bing. 128 I CI. & F. 72 971 68 J. P. 10 Giles o. L. C. C. (1904) 2 L. G. R. 306 446 Giles V. Walker (1890) 24 Q. B. D. 656 ; 59 L. J. Q. B. 416 62 L. T. 933 38 W. R. 782 406, 775, 784 54 J. P. 599 Gill, /KAGooii.'! of (1873) L. R. 3 P. &M. 113 1335 Gill o. Gill [1909] P. 157 100 L. T. 861 78 L. J. P. 60 25 T. L. R. 400 .' 1248 S3 Sol. Jo. 359 Gillard v. Cheshire Lines Committee (1884) 32 W. R. 943 612 Gillespie v. Alexander (1826) 3 Russ. 130 1367 Gillett V. Fairbank (1887) 3 T. L. R. 6i8 365 Gillett . Mawman (1808) I Taunt. 137 Gillingham v. Beddow [1900] 2 Ch. 242 69 L. J. Ch. 527 j 82 L. T. ,791 ; 64 J. P. 617 289, 1031 Gillo, iJe (1891) 8 Morr. 157 1064 Gingell 0. Stepney Borough Council [1908] i K. B. 115 77 L. J. K. B. 347 71 J. P. 486 ; 23 T< L. R. 759 24 T. L. R. 148 ; 6 97 L. T. 599 L. G. R. 180 C. A 693 Ginger, 'fie [1897] 2 Q. B. 461 66 L. J. Q. B. 777 76 L. T. 808 46 W. R. 144 4 Mans. 149 952 Girdlestone v. Brighton Aquarium (1878) 3 Ex. D. 137 ogo Gisbourn v. Hurst (1710) i Salk. 249 249 Gist, Re [1904] I Ch. 398 73 L. J. Ch. 251 90 L. T. 35 1360 52 W. R. 422. Gist, Re [1906] I Ch. 58 75 L. J. Ch. 19 ; 94 L. T. 89 ; 54 W. R. 164 22 T, L. R. 35 affirmed 2 Ch. 280 : 75 L. ]'. Ch. 657 ; 95 L. T. 41 ; 22 T. L. R.fi37 ,3,0
;
.
Re
[1908]
Ch. 513
77 L.
J.
Ch. 298
98 L. T. 121
25 R. P. C.
.......
; ; ; ; ; .
.......
; ; .
. .
'
'
.... ......
.
.132
.......
.
.
...
; . ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Gjer6,ile[i899]2Ch. 54; 68 L.
J.
cxix
PAGE
Ch. 442 ; 80L.T. 689; 47W. R. 535 752, 11 19 Gladdon v. Stoneman (1808) i Madd. 143 n 1332 Gladman . Plumer (1845) '5 L. J. Q. B. 79 ; 10 Jur. 109 652 Gladstone v. Birley (1817) 2 Mer. 404 g6i Glaholm v. Hayes (1841) 2 Scott (N. R.) 471 2 Man. & G. 257 ; 10 L. J. C. P. 98 148 Glamorgan Coal Co. v. S. W. Miners [1903] 2 K. B. 545 ; 72 L. J. K. B. 893 ; 89 L. T. 393 ; [1905] A. C. 239 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 525 ; 92 L. T. 710 53 W. R. 593 ; 21 T. L. R. 441 479 Glasgow Ry. v. Boyd and Forrest [1915] A. C. 526; 84 L. J. P. C. 157
...
H. L. (Sc.) 38 Glassington, Re [1306] 2 Ch. 305 ; 75 L. . . 1361 J. Ch. 670 ; 95 L. T. 100 Gledsbane v. Hewitt (1831) 1 Cr. & J. 555 ; 9 L. 422, 423 J. Ex. (O. S.) 145 . Glegg V. Bromley [1912] 3 K. B. 474 ; 81 L. J. K. B. 1081 ; 106 L. T. 825
C. A. . . . . Gloag's and Miller's Contract, Re (1883) 23 Ch. D. 320 48L. T. 629; 31 W. R. 6oi
. . . .
Glovers. Coleman (1874) L. R. 10 C. P. 108 ; 23 W. R. 163 853 Glover v. L. & S. W. Ry. Co. (1867) L. R. 3 Q. B. 25 37 L. J. Q. B. 57 17 L. T. 139 327 Glubb, Re [1900] i Ch. 354 69 L. J. Ch. 278 ; 82 L. T. 412 39 Glyn V. Howell [1909] i Ch. 666 78 L. J. Ch. 391 loo L. T. 324 Sol. 53 Jo. 269 766 Godard o. Gray (1870) L. R. 6 Q. B. 139 ; 40 L. J. Q. B. 62 ; 24 L. T. 89 ; 19 W. R. 348 323 Godbolt's Case (1577) 4 Leon. 33 742 Goddard's Case (1584) 2 Rep. 5 a 614 Goddard v. Jeffreys (1881) 51 L. J. Ch. 57; 45 L. T. 674; 30 W. R. 269. 38 Godefroy o. Jay (1831) 7 Bing. 413 . 5 M. & P. 284 Godsall V. Boldero (1807) 9 East, 72 308, 474 Godts V. Rose (1855) 17 C. B. 229 ; 25 L. J. C. P. 61 ; i Jur. (N. S.) 1173 W. R. 129 4 922 Goff V. Great Northern Railway Co. (1861) 3 E. & E. 672 7 Jur. (N. S.) 286 ; 3 L- T. 580 352 Goffin V. Donnelly (1881) 6 Q. B. D. 307 ; 50 L. J. Q. B. 303 44 L. T. 141 29 W. R. 440 ; 45 J. P. 439 512 Goldfrei, etc. v. Sinclair [1918] i K. B. 180 118 L. T. 87 L. J. K. B. 261 I47;.34T. L. R. 74-C. A Goldschmidt o. Lyon (1812) 4 Taunt. 534; 13 R. R. 670 239 Goldschmidt v. Oberrheinische Metallwerke [1906] i K. B. 373 75 L. J. K. B. 300 ; 94 L. T. 303 54 W. R. 255 ; 22 T. L. R. 285C. A. 1057 Goldsmid v. G. E. Ry. (1883) 25 Ch. D. 511 53 L. J. Ch. 371 ; 49 L. T. 717 32 W. R. 341 ; (1884) L. R. 9 App. Cas. 927 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 162 ; 52 L. T. 270; 49 J- P- 26; 33 W. R. 8i 684,695 Goman v. Salisbury (1684) i Vern. 240 . Gompertz v. Kensit (1872) L. R. 13 Eq. 369 ; 41 L. J. Ch. 382 26 L. T. 95 ; 20 W. R. 313 1170 Gooch V. Gooch [1893] P. 99 ; 62 L. J. P. 73 ; 68 L. T. 462 41 W. R. 655 I R. 516 1194 Goodall's Settlement, Re [1909] i Ch. 440 882 78 L. J. Ch. 241 ; 100 L. T. 233 Goodall V. Skerratt (18 JS) 3 Drew. 216 ; 24 L. J. Ch. 323 ; i Jur. (N. S.) 57 ; zEq. R. 295; 2W. R. 152 77 Gooddayo. Michell (1595) Cro. Eliz. 441 747 . 1201 Goodden v. Goodden [1892] P. 1 65 L. T. 542 ; 40 W. R. 49 . .
; ; ;
.
.121
;
.337
.
.
..........
. . . . . ; ; . ; ;
.145
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxx
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
;
.
Goode . Burton (1847) i Excb. 189 16 L. J. Ex. 309; li Jur. 851 Goodman's Trusts, Re (1881) 17 Ch. X). 266 50 L. J. Ch. 425 44
; ;
840
L. T.
Goodman
i2o, 1298, 1306 527; 29 W. R. 586 C. A v. Boycott (1861) 2 B. & S. i 31 L. J. Q. B. 69 ; 8 Jur. (N. S.) . 417)425 763; 6L. T. 25 Goodman I!. Chase (1818) I B. & Aid. 297; 19 R. R. 322 290 Goodman v. -Saltash (Mayor) (1882) L. R. 7 App. Cas. 633 680, 704 Goodright 0. Meade (1765) 3 Burr. 1704 548 Goodright o. Richardson (1789) 3 T. R. 462 615,620 Goodright v. Vivian (1807) 8 East, 190 789 Goodson J). DufReld (1612) Moo. 830 693 Goodson V. Richardson (1874) L. R. 9 Ch. 221 43 L. J. Ch. 790 ; 30 L. T. 22 W. R. 337 381 142 Goodtitle d. Palrker v. Baldwin (1809) 1 1 East, 488 80, 848 , Goodtitle v. Herring (1801) i East, 264 660 Goodtitle d. Newman v. Newman (1774) 3 Wils. 316 2 W. Bl. 938 1231
; . ;
Goodtitle
(1770) 3 Wils. I iS Goodwin v. Finlayson (1850) 25 Beav. 65 Goodwyn v. Chevely (1859) 28 L. J. Ex. 298
0.
Tombs
.... .....
;
19,389,767,768
.
1289
4 H.
&
N. 631
W.
R.
631
84,358
Carter (1847) 9 Q.B. 86^ 647,767 Gordon B. Harper (1796) 7 T. R. 9 ; 2 Esp. 465 ; 4 R. R. 369 . 409,414 Gordon o. Jennings (1882) 9 Q. B. D. 45 ; 51 L. J. Q. B. 417 ; 46 L. T. 534 ; 226 30W. R. 704; 46J. P. 519 212 Gordon ^J. Potter (1859) I F. & F. 644 Gordon i). Silber (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 491 ; 59 L. J. Q. B. 507 ; 63 L. T. 283 ; 39 W. R. Ill i 55 J. P. 134 Gorge's and Dalton's C^se (1587) 3 Leon. 196 727 Goring o. Edmonds (1829) 6 Bing. 94 ; 3 M. & P. 259 ; 7 L. J. (0. S.) C. P.
Goody
o.
235
Swanst. 661 Gorries 0. Scott (1874) L. R. 9 Exch. 125 ; 43 L. J. Ex. 92'; 30 L. T. 431 ; 22 W. R. 575 Gosden v. Elphiii (1849) 4 Exch. 447 19 L. J. Ex. 9 13 Jur. 989 Gosling, In the Goads oj (1886) P. D, 79 ; 55 L. J. P. 27 50 J. P. 263 ; 34W. R. 492 . . Gosling 0. Birnie (1831) 7 Bing. 339 ; 5 M. & P. 160 9 L. J. (0. S.) C. P.105 . Gosman, /?e(i88o) 15 Ch. D. 64 753, Goss V. Lord Nugent (1833) 2 N. & M. 28 2 L. J. K. B. j B. & Ad. 58
o.
Goring
.247
440
1247 421 1 103
145
.......
; ; ;
. .
. . [1906] i Ch. 120 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 88 ; 54 W. R. 193 . Goswell's Trusts, lie [1915] 2 Ch. 106 ; 84 L. J. Ch. 719 ; 113 L. T. 319 ; 59 Sol. Jo. 579 Gott v. Gandy (1853) 2 El. & Bl. 845 ; 2 C. L. R. 392 ; 23 L. J. Q. B. i ; 18 . . . . . Jur. 310 ; 2 W. R. 38 . Gould, Re (1887) 19 Q. B. D. 92 ; 56 L. J. Q. B. 333 ; 56 L. T. 806 ; 35 W. R. . 569 ; 4 Morrell, 202
127 Gossehn,
Re
1357 1357
637
1389
Govt, of Newfoundland
;
Newfoundland Ry. (1888) 13 App. Cas. 199; 57 L. J. P. C. 35 58 L. T. 285 P. C 143, 1049 Governments Stock, &c , Co. v. Manila Ry. Co. [1897] A. C. 81 ; 66 L. J.
v.
Ch. 102
75 L. T. 553
45
W.
R. 353
,
1009
56 L. J. Q. B. 131
65 L. J. Ch. 472
" ;
Gowan
b.
297
v,
A
[1896]
. .
35
W. R.
'
986
i
Graham
44
Drummond
596
Ch. 968
.
74 L. T. 417
1408
W. R.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Graham . Ewart (1855) n Exch. 326 Graham v. Johnson (1869) 38 L. J. Ch. 374 L. R. 8 Eq. 36 17 W. R. 810 Graham v. Londonderry (1746) 3 Atk. 393 Graham v. Peak (1801) i East, 244 6 R. R. 268 11 R. R. Preface V. Graham 0. Seal (1919)88 L. J. Ch. 31 119 L.T. 526C. A.
. ; ; ;
cxxi
PAGE
722
142
..... ......
,
934
381
.107
1391
Grainger,
69 L.
i
;
J.
Ch. 789
673
reversed [1902] A. C.
71 L. J. Ch. 132
83 L. T. 209 ; 48 W. R. ; 85 L. T. 763 ; 50
;
W. R. 337 r Grainger v. Kill (1838) 4 Bing. (N. C.) 212; 3 Scott, 561 i Arn. 42; 7 L. J. C. P. 85 2 Jur. 235 Hotel v. White (1914) 84 L. J. Ch. 938 ; no L. T. 209 58 Sol. Jo. Grand
; ;
440
708
v.
Dimes (1846)
15 Sim.
402
17 L. J. Ch. 206
590
(1888) L. R. 13 App. Cas. 800 ; 58 L. J. P. C. I 371 59 L. T. 679 ; 37 W. R. 403 P. C i Grange, Re [1907] i Ch. 313 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 220; 96 L. T. 359; affirmed . 1353, 1360 [1907] 2 Ch. 20 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 456 ; 96 L. T. 867 Grant v. Easton (1883) 13 Q. B. D. 302 ; 53 L. J. Q. B. 68 ; 49 L. T. 645 ;
..
.
32
W.
R. 239
.
1376
.
Grant Grant
(1841)9 M. & W. 113 ; 11 L. J. Ex. 228 v. Grant (1869) L. R. 2 P. & M. 8 39 L. J. P. 17 W. R. 230 Grant v. Thompson (1895) 73 L. T. 264 43 W. R. 446
w. Ellis
; ;
.843
;
21 L. T. 645
15 R.
18
1331
;
290
Grantham zi. Hawley (1615) Hob. 132 Grassi, Re [1905] i Ch. 584 74 L. J. Ch. 341
;
496 940
92 L. T. 455
53
W.
R. 396
70 Graves
5
30
v.
W.
v.
Graves
i ; 51 L. J. Ch. i ; 45 L. T. 397 ; . 918, 1256 14 Cox, C. C. 629 ; 15 Cox, C. C. 118 . Legg (1854) 2 H. & N. 210 ; 26 L. J. Ex. 316 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 519 ; R. 597 135 Weld (1883) j B. & Ad. 105 ; 2 N. & M. 725 ; 2 L. J. K. B.
1242, 125s 46 J. P.
W.
R. 51
176
575 549
J.
Ch. 975
57 L. T. 132
35
W.
R.
.
Gray Gray
Gray Gray Gray Gray
v. v.
W.
o.
0.
(1821) 2 Brod. & B. 667 ; 5 Moore, 527 Bonsall [1904] i K. B. 601 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 515 R. 387 ; 20 T. L. R. 335C. Duke of Northumberland (1806) 13 Ves. 236
Bond
...
;
1264 713
90 L. T. 404
.
52
. v.
Smith (1889) 59 L.
R.
W.
310 C.
J.
....
;
-592
z33 104
99>
799
38
267
Clarkson (1868) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 605 ; 37 L. J. Ch. 550 ; 18 1403 L. T. 494! 16W. R. 716 Graydon, Re [1896] I Q. B. 417 ; I Mac. & G. 655 ; 14 Jur. 157, 211 ; 2 28 H. & Tw. 182 1332. '339) '34, J345 Graysbrooko. Fox (1565) Plowd. 275 Great Berlin Steamboat Co., Re (1884) 26 Ch. D. 616 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 68 ; 51
Grayburn
v.
....
L. T.
445C. A
V.
;
"03
G. E. Ry.
Goldsmid (1884) L. R. 9 App. Cas. 927 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 162 ; 52 403.' 684 L. T. 270 ; 49 J. P. 260 33 W. R. 8i G. E. Ry. V. Lord [1909] A. C. 109 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 160 ; 100 L. T. 130 ; 25 9*' T. L. R. 176; 16 Mans. I
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxxu
TABLE OF CASES
V.
Behrens (1862) 7 H. & N. 950 ; 31 L. J. Ex. 299 ; 8 Jur. (N. S.) 8 L. T. 328 ; 10 W. R. 389 G. W. Ry. V. Bunch (1888) 13 App. Cas. 31 ; 57 L. J. Q. B. 361 ; 58 L. T. 128 : 36 W. R. 785 ; 52 J. P. 147 G. W. Ry. o. Smith (1876) 2 Ch. D. 235 ; 45 L. J. Ch. 235 ; 34 L. T. 267
G. N. Ry.
567
254
256
801
G. G.
24 W. W. Ry.
92
R.
0.
443C. A
38 L. J. Ex. 177;
18W.
249 Talbot [1902] 2 Ch. 759 71 L. J. Ch. 835 ; 87 L. T. 405 312 18 T. L. R. 775 708 Greaves r. Greaves (1872) L. R. 2 P. & D. 423 41 L. J. P. & M. 66 ; 26 L. T. 745 20 W. R. 802 1 170 Green's & Moody's Case (1627) Godb. 384 764 Green, Re [191 1] 2 Ch. 275 80 L. J. Ch. 623 ; 105 L. T. 360 ; 27 T. L. R. 1 174 490 55 Sol. Jo. 552 Green . Belchier (1737) i Atk. 505, "35 Green v. Button (1835) 2 C. M. & R. 707 ; 1 Gale, 349 i Tyr. & Gr. 118 5 L. J. Ex. 81 505 Green v. Duckett (1883) 1 1 Q. B. D. 275 ; 52 L. J. K. B. 435 48 L. T. 677 31W. R. 607; 47J. P. 487 . 321 Green v. Farmer (1768) 4 Burr. 2214 963 Green v. Goddatd (n. d.) 2 Salk. 641 435 Green o. Green (1873) L. R. 3 P. & M. 121 43 L. J. P. & M. 6 29 L. T. 21 W. R. 824 251 1 189 Green .0. Pertwee (1846) 5 Ha. 249 15 L. J. Ch. 372 ; 10 Jur. 538 1267 Green 0. Rheinberg (1911) 104 L. T; 149 C. A. 759 Green v. tribe (1878) 9 Ch. D. 231 38 L. T. 914 ; 27 47 L. J. Ch. 783 W. R. 39 1240, 1254 Green v. Wynn (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. 204 ; 38 L. J. Ch. 220 20 L. T. 131 17 W. R. 385 295, 299 Greene v. Cole (1670) 2 Wms. Saund. 252 ; i Lev. 309 576, 790 Greene v. Greene [19 16] P. 188 ; 85 L. J. P. 224 ; 115 L. T. IZ7 ; 60 Sol. Jo. 32T. L. R. 520 ;. .1180 620; ." Greenland . Chaplin (1850) 5 Exch. 243 19 L. J. Ex. 293 327 Greenlands v. Wilmshurst [1913] 3 K. B. 507 83 L. J. K. B. i ; 109 L. T. 487; 57 Sol. Jo. 740; 29 T. L. R. 685 C. A 336,518 Greenwell v. Low Beechburn Coal Co. [1897] 2 Q. B. 165 ;^ 66 L. J. Q. B. 643 ; 2 Q. B. 165 76 L. T. 759 373, 397 Greenwood, Re [1892] 2 Ch. 295 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 558 ; 67 L. T. 76 ; 40 W. R. . 681 1266 Greer, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 217"; 64 L. J. Ch. 620 72 L. T. 865 59 J. P. 441 ; 43 W. R. 547; 13 R. 598; 2 Mans. 350 1055 Gregg V. Holland [1902] 2 Ch. 360 71 L. J. Ch. 518 ; 86 L. T. 542 ; 18 T. L. R. 563 Manson, 259 C. A 50 W. R. 575 1061 9 Gregory v. Brunswick (D. of) (1844) 6 M. & Gr. 205, 953 i Dow. & L. 518 ; Scott (N. R.) 809 6 I Car. & K. 24 482, 483 Gregory v. Cotterell (1855) 5 E. & B. 571 25 L. J. Q. B. 33 2 Jur. (N. S.) 16 ; 4 W. R. 48 530 Gregory . Hill (1799) 8 T. R. 299 436 Gregory !). Lockyer (1821) 6 Madd. 90 22 R. R. 246 .1182 Gregory v. Piper (1829) 9 B. & C. 591 4 M. & Rv. 500 . 380 Greig, In the Goods of (1866) L. R. i P. & M. 72 ; "35 L. J. P. 1 13 ; 13 L. T. 681; 14W. R. 349 1251 Greig v. National Union, etc. (1906) 22 T. L. R. 274 496 Grendon v. Lincoln (Bishop) (i 575) Plowd. 493 730
W. Ry. W. R.
<,.
'
....
; ;
';
'
....
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Grenfell
. .
CXXIU
PAGE
^^
v. Windsor (Dean and Chapter) (1840) 2 Beav. 544 ggg Grenville-Murray v. Clarendon (Earl) (1869) L. R. 9 Eq. u 39 L. J. Ch. 221 ggg Gretton B. Haward (1819) I Swanst. 413 1279,1280 Greville v. Browne (1859) 7 H. L. C. 689 1398 5 Jur. (N. S.) 849 ; 7 W. R. 673 Grevillc v. Chapman (1844) 5 Q. B. 731 Dav. & M. 553 ; 13 L. J. Q. B. 172 ; 8 Jur. 189 525 Grey's Trusts, Re [1892] 3 Ch. 88 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 622 ; 41 W. R. 60 1274 Grey v. Ellison (1856) i Giff. 438 ; 25 L. J. Ch. 666 2 Jur. (N. S.) 511 4 W. R. 497 Grey v. Hesketh (1755) Ambl. 268 107 Greyvensteyn v. Hattingh [191 1] A. C.'355 80 L. J. P. C. 158 ; 104 L. T. . 360 27 T. L. R. 358 772 Griffin o. Coleman (1859) 4 H. & N. 265 437 Griffith B. Clay [19 12] I Ch. 291 712 Griffith V. Hughes [1892] 3 Ch. 105 62 L. J. Ch. 135 66 L. T. 760 40 W. R. 524 1 140 Griffith V. Owen [1907] i Ch. 195 ; 76 L. 96 L. T. 5 23 T. L. R. J. Ch. 92 1 104, II2J 91 Griffiths. Pound (1890)45 Ch. D. 553 59 L. J. Ch. 522 Griffith B. Pownall (1843) 13 Sim. 393 877,1077 Griffith V. Ricketts (1849) 7 ^^- *99 > '9 L'359 J- ^^- ' i '4 J""^- '^^ Griffith w. Tower Publishing Co. [1897] i Ch. 21 66 L. J. Ch. 12 ; 75 L. T. 141 330 i 45 W. R. 73 Griffiths' Case (1564) Moo. 69 785, 791 Griffiths, Re (1885) 29 Ch. D. 248 54 L. J. Ch. 742 53 L. T. 262 33 W. R. 728 1233 Griffiths V. Dudley (E. of) (1882) 9 Q. B. D. 357 L. J. Q. B. 543 ; 47 L. T. 51 10 30 W. R. 797 46 J. P. 711 448 Griffiths V. Fleming [1909] i K. B. 805 78 L. J. K. B. 567 100 L. T. 765 ; 308 53 Sol. Jo. 340 25 T. L. R. 377 C. A Griffiths V. Griffiths (1871) L. R. 2 P. & M. 300 ; 41 L. J. P. 14 25 L. T. [238 574; 20 W. R. 192 Griffiths V. Lewis (1846) 8 Q. B. 841 ; 15 L. J. Q. B. 249 10 Jur. 711 524 Griffiths V. London, etc.. Dock Co. (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 259 ; 53 L. J. Q. B. 332,449 504; 51 L. T. 533; 33W. R. 35; 49J. P. loo-l-C. A. Sim. 202 Griffiths . Pruen (1840) 1285 Griffiths V. Teetgen (1854) 15 C. B. 344 i Jur. (N. S.) 426 24 L. J. C. P. 35 ; . 466, 467 3 W. R. 1 1 1080,1081 Griffiths . Vere (1803) 9 Ves. 127 Griffiths V. Vesey [1906] i Ch. 796 75 L. J. Ch. 462 94 L. T. 574 ; 54
. ;
...........
; ; .
.
.103
...........
; ;
.
......
. . ; ; ; ;
.832
W. R. 490
137
; ;
Grigg V. National Guardian Insurance Co. [1S91] 3 Ch. 206 61 L. J. Ch. 11 64 L. T. 787 ; 39 W. R. 684 Griggs o. Gibson (1866) 14 W. R. 819 Grill V. General Iron Screw Collier Co. (1866) L. R. i C. P. 600 ; 35 L. J. C. P. 321; 12 Jur. (N. S.) 727; 14L. T. 711; 14W. R. 893
. .
954
585
-199
1062
Grimsby
f.
Ball (1843)
M.
& W.
531
. . .
Grimstead v. Marlowe (1792) 4 T. R. 717 680, 745 . Grimthorpe, Re [1908] 2 Ch. 675 ; 25 T. L. R. 15 1359, 1361 125 Grimwood v. Cozens (i860) 2 Sw. & Tr. 364 ; 5 Jur. (N. S.) 497 Grinham v. Willey (1859) 4 H. & N. 496 ; 28 L. J. Ex. 242 ; 5 Jur. (N. S.) 440 444 ; 7 W. R. 463 Grinnell v. Wells (1844) 7 Man. & G. 1033 8 Scott (N. R.) 741 ; 2 Dow. & L. 610 14 L. J. C. P. 19; 8 Jur. iioi 465
. . ; j
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxxiv
I
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
;
.
Grizewoodn. Blane (1851) n C. B. 526 Groom, Re [1857] 2 Ch. 407 ; 66 L. J. Ch. 778 77 L. T. 154 Groos, Re [1904] P. 269 ; 73 L. J. P. 82 91 L. T. 323 Grove, Re (1888) 40 Ch. D. 216 58 L. J. Ch. 57 59 L. T. 587
. .
IC. A
Grove
18 d. Portal [1902] i Ch. 727 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 299 ; 86 L. T. 350 ; T. L. R.'Jig Groves v. Wimborne (Lord) [1898] 2 Q. B. 402 ; 67 L. J. Q. B. 862 79 L. T.
;
672
328,445,449 284; 47W. R. 87 C.A Grunnell v. Welch [1905] 2 K. B. 650 74 L. J. K. B. 925 93 L. T. 269 21 T. L. R. 554 385 230 Guerriroo. Peile (1820) 3 B. & Aid. 616; 22 R. R. 500 Guests' Estates D. Milner's Safes (191 1) 27 T. L. R. 59 707 Guild 0. Conrad [1894] 2 Q. B. 885 ; 63 L. J. Q. B. 721 ; 71 L. T. 140 42 W. R. 642 290 Gulliver o. Vaux (1746) 8 De G. M. & G. 167 559 Gunsbourg, Re [1920] 2 K. B. 426 ; 89 L.-J. K. B. 725 123 L. T. 353 64 1066 R. 485 C. A. Sol. Jo. 498 ; 36 T. L. 12 Gurnell v. Gardner (1863) 4 Giff. 627 ; 9 L. T. 367 9 Jur. (N. S.) 1220 W. R. 67 965 Gurr. Cuthbert (1843) 12 L. J. Exch. 309 416 Guthingc. Lynti (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 232 33 Guthrie . Armstrong (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 628 229 Guthrie v. Walrond (1883) 22 Ch. D. 573 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 165 47 L. T. 614 ; 1135,1271 31 W. R. 285 Guy V. Churchill (1888) 40 Ch.'D. 481 ; 58 L. J. Ch. 345 ; 60 L. T. 473 37 W. R. 541 . ., 40, 499 Guy o. Livesey (1618) Cro. Jac. 501 472 Guye*. Felton (1813) 4Taunt. 876 476 Guyton & Rosenberg's Contract, Re [1901] 2 Ch.' 591 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 751 ; 85 L. T. 66 1265 50 W. R. 38 Gwinnell 0. Earner (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 658 ; 32 L. T. 835 . Gylbert v. Fletcher (1629) Cro. Car. 179
;
....
;
.'
.......
; . . . .
.
Habergham . Vincent
353
.
.
H.'s Settlement, i? [1909] 2 Ch. 260,; 78 L. J. Ch. 745 (i792)'5 T. R. 92 ; (1793) 2 Ves. Jr. 204
....
;
-397 .217
1230
4 Bro. C. C.
590, 663
Habra
v.
Habra
............
[1914] P. 100
;
83 L. J. P. 54
;
no
L. T. 991
30 T. L. R.
.
i6 L. J. Q. B. 442
iijur. 1012
1191 491,
'
493 Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch. 341 2 C. L. R. 517 ; 23 L. J. Ex. 179 ; 2 W. R. 302 18 Jur. 358 122, 369 Hague c. Doncaster R. D. C. (1908) 100 L. T. 121 25T. L.R. 130 . 74 Haigh . Brooks (1839) 10 A. & E. 309 ; 4 P. & D. 288 94, loi Haighj), Haigh(i869)L. R.,i P.&M.709; 38 L. J. P. &M. 37 20L. T. 281 1201
Hadley
v.
........
; ; ;
...
Haigh
Haire
0.
West
[1893] 2 Q. B. 19
358 ; 4 R. 396 C. A Wilson (1829) 9 B. & C. 643 Haldane 0. Johnson (1853) 8 Ex. 689 ; 22 L. J. Ex. 264 ; 17 Jur. 937 Hale ti. Exeter (Bishop) (1691) 2 Salk. 539 Haley v. Bannister (1819) 4 Madd. 275 ; 20 R. R. 299 Halfen , Brodington (1881) 6 P. D. 13 ; 50 L. J. P. 61 ; 44 L. T. 252 W. R. 444 Halfotd V. Kj^mer (1830) lo B. & C. 724 8 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 3n .
J. P.
v.
;
62 L. J. Q. B. 532
69 L. T. 165
57
...... ....
;
850 507
105,
in
730 1214
1
29
.
177
308
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Halifax Joint Stock Banking Co. v. Gledhill [1891] i Ch. 31 60 L. J. Ch. 181; 63L. T. 623; 39W. R. ro4 Hall, Re [1903] 2 Ch. 226 72 L. J. Ch. 554 88 L. T. 619 51 W. R. 107
; ;
;
cxxv
PAGE
1059
1412. 1413
Hall,
I
In
;
58 Sol. Jo.
30 C.
83 L. J. P.
;
109 L. T. 587
;
30 T. L. R.
A.
56 L. J. Ch. 722
;
1277
56 L. T. 683
;
Hall
Hall
V.
W.
V.
659C. A
:
35
=
752
81 L. J. Ch. 46
loj L. T. 409
55 Sol. Jo.
136 City of London Brewery Co. (1862) 2 B. & S. 737 31 L. J. Q. B. 257 ; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 18 635 Hall V. Fearnley (1842) 3 Q. B. 919 432, 434 Hall V. Flockton (1851) 14 Q. B. 386 16 Q. B. 1039 ; 20 h. J. Q. B. 201 ; IJ Jur. 600 151, 368 HalU. Hallet(i784) I Cox, C. C. 134 1420 Hall V. Hollander (1825) 4 B. & C. 660 7 Dow. & Ry. 133 ; 4 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 39 474 Hall V. Jones (1827) 2 Sim. 41 1224 Hall V. Norfolk (Duke of) [1900] 2 Ch. 493, 500 69 L. J. Ch. 571 ; 64 J. P. 710; 48 W. R. 565; 82L. t. 836; 16T. L. R. 443 . Hall . Nottingham (1875) i Ex. D. i 45 L. J. Ex. 50 ; 33 L. T. 697 ; 24 W. 58 74S, 746 Hall . Odber (1809) II East, ii8 ; 10 R. R. 443 323,990 Hall V. Palmer (1844) 3 Hare, 532 ; 13 L. J. Ch. 352 8 Jur. 459 43, 97 Hall V. Whitcman [1912] i K. B. 683 81 L. J. K. B. 660 105 L. T. 854 28 T. L. R. 161 C. A. 19 Manson, 143 951 Hallas V. Robinson (1885) 15 Q. B. D. 288 54 L. J. Q. B. 364 33 W. R. 246
737
V.
Hall
"
.......
; ; . ; ;
.397
....
; .
.
,C-A.
Re
Hallett,
732C. A
Halley,
49 L.
;
J.
Ch. 415
The (1868) L. R. 2 P. C. 193 7 Moore, Adm. 33; 18L. T. 879; 16W. R. 998-P.
....
42 L. T. 421
;
933,941,954
28
W. R.
1
142,
143
Hallifax (Marquis) v. Higgens (1689) 2 Verti. 134 831 Hallyburton, In the Goods oj (i866) L. R. i P. & M. 90 ; 35 L. J. P. 122 ; 12 1242 Jur. (N. S.)4i6; 14L. T. 136 Halsey c.Lowenfeld [1916] 2 K. B. 707 ; 85 L. J. K. B. 1498 ; 115 L. T. 31B 617; 32 T. L. R. 709 C. A. Halston, i?[i9i2] i Ch. 435; 81 L. J. Ch. 265 ; 106 L.T. 182; 56 Sol. Jo. 311. .1331 Harabley v. Trott (1776) i Cowp. 371 364 Hambro v. Hambro [1894] 2 Ch. 564 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 627 ; 70 L. T. 684 ; 43 W. R. 92; 8R. 413 739,837,838 Hamer . Knowles (1861) 30 L. J. Ex. 102 396 Hamerton v. Stead (1824) 3 B. & C. 478 ; 5 D. & R. 306 ; 3 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. . . . 643 33 ; 27 R. R. 407 Hamilton D. Davis (i 771) 5 Burr. 2732 700 Hamilton (Duke) v. Graham (1871) L. R. 2 H. L. (Sc.) 166 781 Hamilton w. Long [1903] 2 I. R. 407 ; [1905] 2 I. R. 552 . . . 465 Hamilton v. Vaughan Sherrin Electrical Co. [1894] 3 Ch. 589 ; 63 L. J. Ch. . . . . 22, 267 795.; 8 R. 750 i 71 L. T. 325 ; 43 W. R. 126
..... .....
; .
.
37 L. J.
53,339
...... ....... ..
.
Hamilton
s.
Watson
(1845) 12 CI.
i
&
F. 109
;
Hamhn
H.
& N. 408
;
26 L. J. Ex. 20
J.
122,123
;
Hamlyn
Houston [1903]
K. B. 85
72 L.
K. B. 72
T.J-.
R..66 g.
87 L. T. 500
19
350
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxxvi
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Co. v. Brand (1869) L. R. 4 H. L. 171 18 W. R. 12
C. 69
;
Hammersmith Ry.
21 L. T. 238
;
38 L. J. Q. B. 265
Hammerton
v.
Hammond
763
o.
Honey
Camp. 243
8 R. R.
57 L. J. Q. B. 58 60 L. J. Q. B. 539
J.
922 302
152 238
Hammonds v. Barclay (1801) 2 East, 227 Hampden o. Walsh (1876) i Q. B. D. 189 24W. R. 607
Hanbury,
2?e [1904]
i
Ch. 415 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 222 ; 90 L. T. 66 ; 52 W. R. 662 559 Hanbury v. Hanbury [1892] P. 222 ; 61 L. J. P. 115 ; 8 T. L. R. 560 ; [1894] P. 102 ; 63 L. J. P. 105 ; 6 R. 5gi 70 L. T. 569 ; 42 W. R. 434 H. L. (E.). .26, 347 C. A. ; reversed[i%q^'\ A. C. 417; 11 R. 302; 72L. T. 480 Hanbury . Jenkins [1901] 2 Ch. 401 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 730 ; 65 J. P. 631 ; 49 W. R. 615; 17T. L. R. 539 676,705,719 Hancock, Re [1905] i Ch. 16 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 69 ; 91 L. T. 737 ; 53 W. R. 89 . 1279 Hancock 0. Peaty (1867) L. R. i P. & M. 335 ; 36 L. J. P. & M. 57 ; 16 L. T.
;
..........
;
45 L.
Q. B. 238
33 L. T. 852
310
182; 15
W.
R. 719
1175
.
1402 (1830) i B. & Ad. 260 ; 8 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 403 v. Smith (1889) ^i Ch. D. 456 ; 58, L. J. Ch. 725 ; 61 L. T. 341 '. 1 142, 1 C. A. . . . . . 143 Handcock v. Baker (1800) 2 B. & P. 260 ; 5 R. R. 587 . 385, 437
Hancock Hancock
Podmore
Handford
Hanfcey
v.
v.
&
Bing. 359
Martin (1883) 49 L. T. 560 570, Hankinson o. Bilby (1847) 16 M. & W. 442 Hannaford v. Hannaford (1871) L. R. 7 Q. B. 116 Hannam v. Mockett (1824) 2 B. & C. 934 ; 4 Dow. & Ry. 518 ; 2 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 183 ; 26 R. R. 591 769, Hanson v. Waller [1901] i Q.'B. 396 70 L. J. Q. B. 231 49 W. R. 445 84 L. T. 91 ; 17 T. L. R. 162 Harben v. Phillips (1S83) 23 Ch. D. 14 48 L. T. 334 31 W. R. 173 C. A. Harburg India Rubber Co. v. Martin [1902] i K. B. 778 ; 71 L. J. K. B. 529 86 L. T. 505 ; 50 W. R. 449 Hardaker v. Idle District Board [1896] i Q. B. 335, 340 74 L. T. 69 65 L. J. Q. B. 363 44 W. R. 323 ; 60 J. P. 196 C. A. Hardcastle . Dennison (1861) 4 L. T. 707 Hardcastle v. S. Y. Ry. Co. (1859) 4 H. & N. 67 28 L. J. Ex. 139 5 Jur. (N. S.) 150 7 W. R. 326 Hesketh (1859) 4 H. & N. 175 Harden . Harding, Ex parte (1879) L. R. 12 Ch. D. 557 ; 41 I.. T. 388 Harding . Cooke (1831) 7 Bing. 346 Harding v. Harding (1872) L. R. 13 Eq. 493 ; 41 L. J. Ch. 523 : 26 L. T. 656 Harding o. Harding (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 442 55 L. J. Q. B. 462 34 W. R.
. . . .
. .
......
;
Moore, 74
655
770
353 96
291 355
......
; . .
'.
586
774 549
154 389 839
142
Hardingham
775
v.
NichoUs (1745) 3 Atk. 304 Hardman !;. Willcock (1832) 9 Bing. 382 n. Hardoon v. Belilios [1901] A. C. 118 ; 70 L. J. P. C. 9 ; 83 L. T. 573 ; 17 T. L. R. 126 ; 49 W. R. 209 Hardy, JS'x parte (i 861) 30 Beav. 206 Hardy, Re (1881) 17 Ch. D. 798 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 241 44 L. T. 49 ; 29 W. R. 834 Hare v. Burges (1857) 4 K. & J. 45 27 L. J. Ch. 86 3 Jur. (N. S.) 1294 ; 6 W. R. 144 617, Hargrave v. Le Breton (1769) 4 Burr. 2422
: ; ;
756 233
1138 1361
1266 1077
406
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Hargreave v. Spink [1892] W. R. 254
Hargreaves,
i
cxxvii
PAGE
Q. B. 25
;
61 L. J. Q. B. 318
65 L. T. 650
40
Re
947
59 L. J. Ch. 375
;
62 L. T.
819C. A.
1378, 1387
. .
Hargreaves v. Parsons (1844) '3 M. & W. 561 14 L. J. Ex. 250 290 Hargrove, iJe [191 5] I Ch. 398; 84 L. J. Ch. 484 ; 112L. T. 1062; 59 Sol. Jo. 364 1280 Hargthorpe o. Milforth (1594) Cro. Eliz. 318 1422 Harington v. Hoggart (1830) i B. & Ad. 577 9 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 14 320 Harkero. Birkbeck (1764) 3 Burr. 1563; rW. Bl. 482 381 Harlock v. Ashberry (1882) 19 Ch. D. 539 51 L. J. Ch. 394 46 L. T. 356 30 W. R. 327 C. A 846 Harman v. Jones (1841) Cr. & Ph. 299 374 Harmer v. Cornelius (1858) 5 C. B. N. S. 236 28 L. J. C. P. 85 + Jur. (N. S.) T 1 10 ; 6 W. R. 749 210,213,222 Harmer v. Jumbil Tea Areas (1920) 37 T. L. R. 91 C. A. 635 Harmood 0. Oglander (1803) 8 Ves. 106 1392 Harndenj Ex pane (1859) 28 L. J. Bky. 18 7 W. R. 5 Jur. (N. S.) 852 280 998 Harnett v. Maitland (1847) 16 M. & W. 257 ; 4 D. & L. 545 16 L. J. Ex. 134 647 Harper 0. Luffkin (1827) 7 B. & C. 387 i Man. & Ry. 166 ; 6 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 23 467 Harper v. Mclntyre (1908) 99 L. T. igi 24 T. L. R. 738 52 Sol. Jo.
;
...
; ; .
.
...... ......
;
.
533
"44
v.
Harriman
Harriman [1909]
P. 123
78 L.
J. P.
62
100 L. T. 557
;
73 J. P.
...........
;
1189
.
72
J. P. 501
25 T. L. R. 3
.
Chatel (1781) i Bro. C. C. 124 v. Victoria Graving Dock (1878) 3 Q. B. D. 549 47 L. J. Q. B. 594 39 L. T. 120 26 W. R. 740 Harris, In the Goods oj (1870) 2 P. & M. 83 22 L. T. 630 39 L. J. P. 48 18W. R. 901 iii L. T. 666 Harris, Re [1914] 2 Ch. 395 83 L. J. Ch. 841 58 Sol. Jo.
v.
.
.
Du
42
232
1332
'379, 1380 653 Harris v. Austin (:6i3) 3 Bulstr. 36 728 Harris v. Booker (:827) 4 Bing. 96 ; 12 Moore, 283 652 5 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 92 Harris v. Brisco (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 504 55 L. J. Q. B. 423 ; 55 L. T. 14 40, 498 34 W. R. 729 Harris v. Butler (1798) i Hagg, 463 n 503 Harris v. Butler (1837) 2 M. & W. 539 Murph. & H. 117 6 L. J. Ex. 133
; ; ; ; ;
Jur. 608
v. v.
Harris Harris
J.
467 863
;
De Pimm
(1886) 33 Ch.
V).
238
;
56 L. J. Ch. 344
.
54 L. T. 38 5/50
711
. .
P. 308
v.
Ekins (1872) 26 L. T. 827 20 W. R. 999 v. Fergusson (1848) 16 Sim. 308 v. Flower (1905) 74 L. J. Ch. 127 ; 91 L. T. 816 ; 21 T. L. R. 13 . Goodwyn (1841) 2 Scott (N. R.) 459 ; 9 D. P. C. 409 ; 2 Man. & G. ^ 405 ; 10 L. J. C. P. 62 Harris . Harris (1861) 29 Beav. no
Harris Harris Harris Harris
. .
.
.......
.
787
1091
708
150
76
291 'As 1287
11.
Huntback
v. p.
(1757) i Burr. 373 . Jays (1599) Cro. pliz. 699 Lloyd (1823) I Turn. & Russ. 310; 24 R. R. 68
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxxviii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
. .
.
Harris
'
. ^orris (1801) 4 Esp. 41 . 1 . 57 Hams V. Perry [1903] 2 K. B. 219 72 L. J. K. B. 725 ; 89 L. T. 174 . . 259 Harris . Petherick (1879) 4^ L. J. Q. B. 521 4 Q. B. D. 611 ; 41 L. T. 146 C. A. . . 124, 371 Harris v. Ryding (1839) 5 M. & W. 60 8 L. J. Ex. 181 . 781 Harris 0. Truman (1882) 9 Q. B. D. 264 51 L. J. Q. B. 338 ; 46 L. T. 844 go W. R. 533 233 Harrison, Re (1886) 32 Ch. D. 395 55 L. J. Ch. 687 ; 55 L. T. 150 34 W. R. 736 1381 Harrison v. Barton (i860) i J. & H. 287 ; 30 L. J. Cb. 213 7 Jur. (N. S.) 1091 19 i 9 W. R. 177 Harrison & Bottomley, Re [1899] i Ch. 465 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 208 80 L. T., 29 ; 863 47 W. R. 307 C. A. Harrison 0. Bush (1855) 5 El. & Bl. 344 ; 25 L. J. Q. B. 25 ; i Jur. (N. S.) 846 3 W. R. 4^74 518 Harrison o. Goodall (1852) Kay, 310 n. 1230 Harrison v. James (1862) 7 H. & N. 804 31 L. J. Ex. 248 221 Harrison o. L. B. & S. C. Ry. (1862) 2 B. & S. 122 31 L. J. Q. B. 113 ; 8 Jur. (N. S.)740,; 6L. T. 466 257 Harrison v. L. & N. W. Ry. (1885) i Cab. & E. 540 473 Harrison v. Paynter (1840) 6 M. & W. 387 ; 8 Dowl. 349 9 L. J. Ex. 169 . 4 Jur. 488 532 Harrison v. Rutland (D. of) [1893] i Q. B. 142 ; 62 L.J. Q. B. 117 57 J. P. 278 ; 4 R. 155 68 L. T. 35 41 W. R. 322 C. A. 384, 435, 443 Harrison D. Smith (1869) 20 L. T. 713 507 Harrison . Southwarfc & Vauxhall Co. [1891] 2 Ch. 409 ; 60 L. J. Ch. 630 L. T. 864 . 64 Harrison o. Weldon (173 1) 2 Stra. 911 1350 Harrod c. Harrod (1854) i K. & J. 4 ; 18 Jur. 853 2 W. R. 612 "55 Harrold v. Plenty [1901] 2 Ch. 314; 70 L. J. Ch. 562; 85 L. T. 45 17 8 Mans. 304 T. L. R. 545 955 Harrold 0. Watney (1898) zQ. B. 320 67 L. J. Q. B. 771 ; 78 L. T. 788 ? 46 W. R. 642 C. A. 334 Harrop's Estate, Re (1857) 3 Drew. 726 .1361, 1362 Harrop . Hirst (1868) L. R. 4 Exch. 43 ; 38 L. J. Ex. i 19 L. T. 426 ; 17 W. R. 1*64 327 Harsant v. Blaine (1887) 56 L. J. Q. B. 511 233 Harse o. Pearl Assurance Co. [1904] i K. B. 558 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 373 90 L. T. 245 ; 52 W. R. 457 ; 20 T: L. R. 264 308 Hart, Ee [1912] 3 K. B. 6 81 L. J. K. B. 1213 ; 107 L. T. 368 ; 28 T. L. R. 482 C. A 860, 1070 Hart V. Aldridge (1774) i Cowp. 54 475 Hart V. Baxendale (1851) 6 Ex. 769 21 L. J. Ex. 123 ; 16 Jur. 126 . 254 Harto. Mills(i846) 15M. &W. 85; 15 L. J. Ex. 200 88 Hart s. Rogers [1916] i K. B. 646 85 L. J. K. B. 273 114 L. T. 329 ; 32 T. L. R. 150 . 635 Hart o. Windsor (1842) 12 M. & W. 68 13 L. J. Ex. 129 ; 8 Jur. 150 636 Harter c. Colman (1882) 19 Ch. D. 630 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 481 46 L. T. 154 30W. R. 484 . 834 Hartley, JJ.r parte (1835) I Deac. 288 836 68 L. J. P. 16 JHartley, In the Goods nj [1899J P. 40 47 W. R. 287 1327, 1338,
v.
.......
; . . . ; .
,
....... .......
; . . ' . .
.
'
.394
....
.
.
Hartley
0.
Cummings
2 Car.
& K. 433
1392
;
17 L. J. C. P. 84
;
12 Jur. 57
Hartley
0.
Harnman
B.
&
475
Aid. 620
;
2 Stark. 212
Holt, 617
359, 360
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Hartley
o.
cxxix
PAGE
(1866) L. R. i C. P. 553 ; Har. & R. 607 ; 35 L. J. M. C. 255 ; 12 Jur. (N. S.) 502 ; 14 W. R. 862 438 Hartley v. Moxham (1842) 3 Q. B. 701 ; 12 L. J. Q. B. 41 ; 3 G. & D. i ; Car. & M. 504 ; 6 Jur. 946 407 Hartopp's and Cock's Case (1627) Hutt. 88 671, 728 Hartwell . Hartwell (1799) 4 Ves, 811 42 Harvey's (Sir E.) Estate, Re [1893] i Ch. 567 ; 62 L, J. Ch. 328 ; 68 L. T. 1288 562 ; 41 W. R. 293 ; 3 R. 247 Harvey v. Bridges (1845) M. & W. 437 ; i Exch. 261 ; 3 D. & L. 55 ; 14 L. J. Ex. 272 i 9 Jur. 759 82, 383, 435 Harvey v. Gibbons (1675) 2 Lev. 161 95, 129 Harvey t>. Grabham (1836) j A. & E. 61 ; 6 N. & M. 154; 5 L. J. K. B.
Hindmarsh
235
'45
Harvey Harvey
343
v.
v.
Newlyn
743
;
42 L. J. C. P. 105
28 L. T.
7'
v.
47' (1844) 7 M. & G. 644 Harvic v. Blacklole (i6io) Brownl. 236 . 699 Haslewood v. Pope (1734) 3 P. Wms. 322 1374 Hasluck o. Clark [1899] i Q. B. 699 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 486 ; 80 L. T. 454 ; 47 W.,R. 471 ; 15 T. L. R. 277 ; 6 Manson, 146 C. 1389 682 Haspurt o. WiUs (1670) I Vent. 71 Hastelow v. Jackson (1828) 8 B. & C. 221 ; 2 M. & Ry. 209 ; 6 L. J. (O. S.) 32 K. B. 318 Hastings, / tie Goo</so/ (1878) 4 P. D. 73 ; 47L. J. P. 30; 39 L. T. 45...1331, 1332 Hastings v. Douglas (1632) Cro. Car. 343 934 Hastings (Corporation of), . Letton[i9o8] i K. B. 378 ; 77 L. J. K. B. 149 ; 14 97L. T. 582; ijManson, 58; 23T. L. R. 456 .1170 HasweU v. Haswell (i88i) 51 L. J. P. D. & A. 15 ; 30 W. R. 231 Hatch o. Hatch (1804)9 Ves. 292; 7 R. R. 195 35 Hatchard v. Mege (1887) 18 Q. B. D. 771 ; 56 L. J. Q. B. 397 ; 56 L. T. 662 ;
Harvey
Watson
35
W.
v.
Hatten
362,406,428
;
38 Ch. D. 334
58 L. T. 271
36
49. '48
W.
Hatter
R. 317
v.
(1696) i Ld. Raym. 84 Hatton V. May (1876) 3 Ch. D. 148 ; 24 W. R. 754 Hawes v. Draeger (1883) 23 Ch. D. 173 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 449
Ash
614
995
;
48 L. T. 518
W.
Hawes
R. 576
1207
(1824) 2 B. & C. 540 ; 4 D. & R. 22 ; R. & M. 6 ; 2 L. J (0. S.) K. B. 83 ; 26 R. R. 448 Hawke o. Corri (1820) 2 Hagg. Con. 280 Hawken v. Shearer (1887) 56 L. J. Q. B. 284 Hawkes v. Hubback (1870) L. R. 11 Eq. 5 ; 40 L. J. Ch. 49 ; 23 L. T. 642
v.
Watson
19
W. R.
117
49 L.
J. Q. B. 333
42 L. T.
520
28
W.
R. S57
L. R. 6 Ch. App. 538
;
40 L.
J. Ch.
534
1228
541
Creasy (1801) 2 East, 104 Hayes o. Foorde (1770) 2 D. Bl. 698 Haygarth, Re [1912J i Ch. Jio ; 81 L. J. Ch. 255 ; 106 L. T. 93 ; 56 Sol. Jo, 239 Hayles v. Pease [1899] i Ch. 567 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 222 ; 80 L. T. 220 ; 47 W. R, 370
C.L.
660
1078
782
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxxx
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Haynes,
Haynes
........
;
;
J. C. P.
372
40 L. T. 536
429 1332
Ch. 361
70 L.
J.
J.
Ch. 302
:
84 L. T. 139
;
49
906, 1280
W.
,
Hayward,
296
iJc [1901]
.
'
Ch. 221
70 L.
Ch. 155
84 L. T. 256
;
49
W. R.
1380
Hayward
East London Waterworks Co. (1884) 28 Ch. D. 138 54 L. J. Ch. 523; 52 L.T. 175; 49 J. P. 452 Hayward o. Raw (1861) 6 H. & N. 308 Haywood a. Brunswick Building Society (1881) 8 Q. B. D. 403 ; 51 L. J. Q. B: 73; 45L. T..699; 30W. R. 29.9 Head o. Briscoe (1833) 5 C. & P. 484 Head v. Head (1919) 88 L. J. Ch. 236 63 Sol. Jo. 464 35 T. L. R. 352 Head v. tattersall (1871) 41 L. J. Ex. 4 ; L. R. 7 Ex. 7 ; 25 L. T. 631 20 W. R. 115 Heald v. Carey (1852) 11 C. B. 977 21 L, J. C.P. 97 ; 16 Jur. 197 Heald v. Kenworthy (1855) 10 Exch. 739 24 L. J. Ex. 76 ; i Jur. (N. S.) 70 ; 3 W. R. 176 Hearle v. Greenbank (1749) 3 Atk. 695 i Ves. 303 899, 901, 1233, Heasman v. Pearse (1871) L. R. 7 Ch. 275 41 L. J. Ch. 705 27 L. T. 89 ; 20 W. R. 876 Heath, Re [1907] 2 Ch. 270 76 L. J. Ch. 450 ; 97 L. T. 41 Heath . Crealock (1874) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 22 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 1,57 ; 31 L. T. 650 Heath o. Deane [1905] 2 Ch. 86 74 L. J. Ch. 466 96 L. T. 643 ; zi T. L. R. 404 Heath v. Perry (1744) 3 Atk. loi Heatho. Pugh (1881) 6Q. B. D. 345 Heath's Garage, Ltd. /. Hodges [1916] i K, B. 206 85 L. J. K. B. 1289 14 L. G. R. 911 ; 60 115 L. T. 129 ; 80 J. P. 321 [1916] 2 K. B. 370 Sol. Jo. 554 32 T. L. R. 570 C. A Heather, Re [1906] ? Ch. 230 5 75 L. J. Ch. 658 95 L. T. 352 54 W. R. 625 Heaven o. Pender (1883) 1 1 Q. B. D. 503 52 L. J. Q. B. 702 30 W. R. 749
v.
. .
328
591
...
;
.803 -356
.
11
16
146 419
63 1271 1078 1317
8n
606
1271
....'.. .......
; . ; ; ; ; . ; ;
846
358 1283
T. 357; 47 J. P. 709 C. 332 Hebblethwaite v. Peever [1892] i Q. B. 124 ; 40 W. R. 318 . 986 Hebden v. West (1863) 3 B. & S. 579 ; 32 L. J. Q. B. 85 ; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 747 306, 308 7 L. T. 854 ; 1 1 W. R. 422 Hebditch v. McUwaine [1894] 2 Q. B. 54 : 9 R. 452 ; 63 L. J. Q. B. 587 ; 70
49L.
..
W.
L. T. 826
Hedges
o.
Tagg
....'.
;
518,519
465,
20
R. 976.
466
Heddy
Cro.Eliz. 558 681,694 Heffield v. Meadows (1869) L. R. 4 C. P. 595 ; 20 L. T. 746 . . 292 Hegarty v. Shine (1878) 14 Cox C. C. 145 433 Helier c. Okeden (1560) Moo. 14 . 656 Hellawell v. Eastwood (1851) 6 Exch. 295 ; 20 L. J. Ex. 154 . . . 691 Hellman's Will, Re (1866) L. R. 2;Eq. 363 ; 14 W. R. 682 . 1234 Hellwig V. Mitchell [1910] i K. B. 609 ; 79 L. J. Q. B. 270 ; 102 L. T. no ; 26 T. L. R. 244 504 Helmore v. Smith (1886) 35 Ch. D. 449 ; 56 L. J. Ch. 145 ; 56 L. T. 72 ; 35
.
Wheelhouse
....... .. ..........
11 C. B.
;
W.
Helyar
R. 157
v.
2to
Helsham
0.
Blackwood (1851)
;
.........
;
in
511
1231
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
6 Jut. 858 Hemming v. Hale (1859) 7 C. B. N. S. 487: 29 L. (N. S.)554; 8W. R. 116
CXXXl
PAGE
Heming
v.
Power
(1842) 10
M.
& W.
.
564
224
T.
C. P.
.
137: 6
.
Tur,
.
,.
Gasson (1858) El. Bl. & El. 346 27 L. T. Q. B. 252 ; 4 Tur. (N. S.) 834 6 W. R. 601 Hemmings v. Stoke Poges Club [1920] i K. B. 720 89 L. J. K. B. 744 122 L. T. 479; 64S0I. Jo. 131 36T. L. R. 77 C. A Hemstead v. Phoenix Gas Co. (1865) 3 H. & C. 745 ; 34 L. J. Ex. 108 ; 11 Jur, (N. S.) 626 ; 12 L. T. 313 13 W. R. 662 Henderson v. A. R. Mail Co. (1885) 5 El. & Bl. 400 24 L. T. Q. B. 322 ; Jur. (N. S.) 830 3 W. R. 571 . Henderson v. Bromhead (1859) 4 H. & N. 569; 28 L. J. Ex. 360; 5 Jur. (N.S.)ii75; 7W.R.492 Henderson o. Comptoir d'Escompte de Paris (1872) L. R. 5 P. C. 253 ; 42 L. J. P. C. 60 ; 29 L. T. 192 ; 21 W. R. 873 2 Asp. M. L. C. 98 Henderson v. Eason (1851) 17 Q. B. 701 21 L. J. Q. B. 82; 16 Jur "
v.
; ; . ; ; ; ;
. ; .
Hemmings
.... ...
230
383
....
; ;
.
472
53
512
943
Hensworth v. Fowkes (1833) i B. & Ad. 449 Henthorn v. Fraser [1892] 2 Ch. 27; 6i L.
319 20 W. R. 23 490 v. Stobart (1850) 5 Ex. 19 L. J. Ex. 135 151 99 v. Williams [1895] i Q. B. 521 64 L. J. Q. B. 308 14 R- .175; 72 L. T. 98 43 W. R. 274 C. A. 33,414 Henn's Case (1632) W. Jones, 297 709 Henniker v. Howard (1,904) 90 L. T. 1 57 779 Henning o. Burnet (1852) 8 Exch. 187 22 L. J. Ex. 79 708 Hensloe's Case (t6oo) 9 Rep. 38 b 1328 Hensman v. Fryer (1867) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 420 37 L. J. Ch. 97; 17 L. T. 1265 394 16 W. R. 162 Henson, Re [190S] 2 Ch. 356 77 L. J. Ch. 598 99 ..T.'336 : 1410
5
t>.
.'
489
J.
Ch. 373
41
66 L. T. 439
40
89,91
L. R. 7 C. P. 606
;
J. C. P.
6^6
26 L. T.
S', 526
Lordan (1865) 34 L. J. Ch. 293 i Jur. (N. S.) 132; 13 W. R. 368 ; 2 H. & M. 345 Hepworth v. Hill (1862) 10 Beav. 476 Herald v. Connah (1876) "34 L. T. 885 Herbage Rents, Re [1896] 2 Ch. 811 65 L. J, Ch. 871 75 L. T. 148 ; 45
u.
; . .
.
Hepburn
402
1396
61
W. R. 74
.738
Herbert's Case (1731) 3 P. Wms. 116 . 1230 Herbert v. Turball (1663) i Keb. 589 I Hercy v. Birch (1804) 9 Ves. 357 127 Herlakenden's Case (1589) 4 Rep. 62 a . 786,787 Hermann v. Charlesworth [1905] 2 K. B. 123 ; 74 L. .K. B.620; 54W.R. 22 ; 93 L. T. 284 ; 21 T. L. R. 368 C. A, 42, 43, 321 Hernando, Re (1884) 27 Ch. D. 284 53 L. J. Ch. 865; 51 L. T. 117; 33 W. R. 252 1255 Hervey v. Hervey (1739) i Atk. 561 873 Heseltine v. Simmons [1892] 2 Q. B. 547 62 L. J. Q. B. 5; 67 L. T. 611 950,951 57 J. P. 53 41 W. R. 67 ; 4 R. 52 C. Hesketh v. Braddock (1766) 3 Burr. 1858 12 Hethrington v. Graham (1829) 6 Bing. 135 . 1323 Heugh V. L. & N. W. Ry. (1870) L. R. 5 Ex. 51 39 L. J.Ex.48;2iL.T. 676 251 Hewett, Re [1894] i Ch. 362 63 L. J. Ch. 182 ; 70 L. T. 393 ; 42 W. R. 1092 233; 8 R. 70
. .
.
12
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxxxii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
. ;
Hewlson v. Guthrie (1836) 2 Bing. N. C. 755 3 Scott, 298 ; 5 L. J. C. P. 283 Hewitt 0. Kaye (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 198 ; 37 L. J. Ch. 633 ; i6 W. R. 835 ." Hewitt o. Wright (1780) i Bro. C. C. 86
.
968
1293 I3S9 493
Hewlett
Taunt. 277 HewUns v. Shippam (1826) 5 B. & C. 221 (O. S.)K. B. 241; 31 R. R..757
B.
Cruchley (1813)
7 Dow.
&
Ry. K. B. 783
4 L.
J.
671,705
1351
Shelley [1914] 2 Ch. 13 ; 83 L. J. Ch. 607 ; no L. T. 785 ; 58 Sol. Jo. 397 ; 30 t. L. R. 402 C. Hext V. Gill (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 699 : 41 L. J. Ch. 761 ; 27 L. T. 291 ;
Hewson
e.
20 W. R. 957 594i 782 Heydou's Case (1584) 3 Rep. 7 a 589 Heydon's & Smith's Case (161 1) 13 Co. Rep. 69 4" Heys, In the Estate of [1914] P. 192 83 L. J. P. 152 ; in L. T. 941 ; 30 1246 T. L. R. 637 59 Sol. Jo. 45 Heys s. Tindall (1861) i B. & S. 296 ; 30 L. J. Q. B. 362 4 L. T. 403 9 230 W. R. 664 Heyward's Case (1595) 2 Rep. 34 b, 35 a 609, 652 Heywood, Re [1897] 2 Ch. 593 ; 67 L. J. Ch. 25 ; 77 L. T. 423 ; 46 W. R. 72 1388 Heyworth 0. Knight (1864) 17 C. B. N. S. 298 ; 33 L. J. C. P. 298 ; 10 Jur.
; ; ; ;
. .
.'
56
;
Hick
o.
41
Q. B. 98
L. (E.)
R. 125
R. 528
68 L. T. 175
affirmed,
112
L.
;
Hickman
b.
T. L. R. 163 . Hicks' Case (1619) Hob. 215 ; Poph. 139 Hicks v. Faulkner (1878) 8 Q. B. D. 167 ; 51 L. J. Q. B. 268 ; 30 W. R. 545 ; affirmed (1882) 46 L. T. 427 ; 46 J. P. 420 C. Hicks V. Newport, &c., Ry. (18517) 4 B. & S. 403 n Higgens' Case (1605) 6 Co. Rep. 44 b . . Higges V. Austen (1609) Yelv. 152 ; 2 Bulst. 82 ; Poph. loi Higginbotham v. Hawkins (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 676 ; 41 L. J. Ch. 828 ; 27 L. T. 328 ; 20 W. R. 955 Higginbottora, Re [1892] 3 Ch. 132 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 74 ; 67 L. T. 190 ; 3 R. 23
......
A
.
37
497 502
491 371 149 504
. Roll. Rep. 55 Butcher (1606) Yelv. 89 i Brownl. 205 ; Noy, 18 . 478 Grant (1583) Cro. EUz. 18 678, 727 iz6 Samels (1862) 2 John. & H. 460 ; 7 L. T. 240 & Dean, Re [1899] i Q. B. 325 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 198 ; 79 L. T. 673 ; 14 47 W. R. 285 Higgs 1). Holiday (1600) Cro. Eliz. 746 414 Highmore v. Primrose (1816) 5 M. & S. 65 322 Hilbers 0. Parkinson (1883) 25 Ch. D. 200 53 L. J. Ch. 194 49 L. T. 502 32W. R. 315 570 Hilbery v. Hatton (1864) 2 H. & C. 822 ; 33 L. J. Ex. 190 ; 10 L. T. 39 350, 420 Hill's Case (1875) 44 L. J. Ch. 423 ; L. R. 20 Eq. 585 ; 32 L. T. 747 ; 23 W.R. 646 15s Hill, Re [1902] I Ch. 807 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 417 ; 86 L. T. 336 ; 50 W. R. 434; ' 18T. L. R. 487C. A.' . . Hill V. Begg [1908] 2 K. B. 802 ; 77 L. J. K. B. 1074 ; 99 L. T. 104 ; 24 T. L. R. 711 . 458 Hill V. Chapman (1789) 2 Bro. C. C. 612 ; i Ves. J. 407 1233 Hill V. Cooper [1893] 2 Q. B. 85 62 L. J. Q. B. 423 69 L. T. 216 57 J. P. 663 ; 41 W. R. 500 4 R. 418 1199 Hill o. Curtis (1865) L. R. i Eq. 90 ; 35 L. 13 L. T. 584 ; 12 Jur. J. Ch. 133 (N:S.) 4; 14 W.R. 125 1343,1344
;
.
Andrews (1620) 2
.....
.
....
; .
.928
....
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Hill
V.
cxxxiii
PAGE
Ch. 466
74 L.
J. Cb.
237
53
W.
R. 457
21 T. L. R. 1031
Hill 0.
Hill
Hill V.
371C. A
Hill
(1859) 4 H. &N. 359 Grange (1556) 1 Plowd. 164 Hill [1897] I Q. B. 483 ; 66 L. J. Q. B. 329
Fox
312 675
;
76 L. T. 103
. .
.
45
.
.
W.
R.
934, 1356
Hillw. Kitching(i846) 3 C. B. 299; 15 L. J. C. P. 251 . V. London (Bishop of) (1738) i Atk. 618 755 Hill V. London Central Markets Cold Storage Co. (19 10) 102 L. T. 715 ; 26 T. L.'R. 397; 15 Com. Cas. 22: 963,967 Hill V. Manchester, &c., Waterworks Co. (1833) 5 B. & Ad. 866 ; 2 N. & M. ". 11 573 ; 3 L. J. K. B. 19 . Hill V. New River Co. (1868) 9 B. & S. 303 ; 18 L. T. 555 327, 403 Hill V. Rattey (1862) 2 J. & H. 634 995 Hill V. Scott [1895] 2 Q. B. 371, 713 ; 65 L. J. Q. B. 87 ; 73 L. T. 458 C. A. 261 Hill B. Smith (1809) 10 East, 475 ; 10 R. R. 357 850 Hill V. Tupper (1863) 2 H. & C. 121 ; 32 L. J. Ex. 217 ; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 725 ; 8 L. T. 792 ; 1 1 W. R. 784 670 Hillso. Hills(i84i)8M. . 401 ; loL. J. Ex.440; 5 Jur. 1185 1294
.237
......
.
&W.
Hills
V.
Mills (1691)
Salk. 36
1332, 1341
t". Sughrue (1846) 15 M. & W. 253 129 1121 Hilton, i?f [1909] 2 Ch. 548 ; loi L. T. 229 Hilton o. Granville (Earl) (1841) i Cr. & Ph. 292 ; (1844) 5 Q. B. 701 ; Dav. . &M. 614 ; 13 L. J. Q. B. 193 ; 8 Jur. 310 374, 586, 594, 718 Hilton V. Ticker (1888) 39 Ch. D. 669 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 973 ; 59 L. T. 172 ; 36 W. R. 762 922, 923, 954 Hinchinbrooke v. Seymour (1784) i Bro. C. C. 395 87:
Hills
.....
K. B. 115
; ;
664
C. 200
;
5 L. J. (O. S.)
D.
&
;
R. 351
45
30 R. R. 290
[1896] 2 Ch.
I
1181
;
W. R. 252 720, 773, Rabett (1839) 5 Bing. N. C. 623 Hinson 0. Burridge (1594) Moo. 701 Hinton v. Heather (1845) 14 M. & W. 131 15 L. J. Ex. 39 Hiort V. L. & N. W. Ry. (1879) 4 Ex. D. i88 48 L. J. Ex. 545 40 L. T. 674 27 W. R. 778 C. A Hippisley v. Knee [1905] i K. B. i ; 74 L. J. K. B. 68 92 L. T. 20 ; 21 T. L. R. 5 232, 235, Hipwell V. Knight (1835) i Yo. & C. (Eq. Ex.) 415 4 L. J. Ex. Eq. 52 Hirst, 2Je(i892) 68 L. T. 557; 2 R. 409 C. A Hirst V. West Riding Banking Co. [1901] 2 K. B. 560 ; 70 L. J. K. B. 828
'
Hindson 484
o.
Ashby
65 L. J. Ch. 515
74 L. T. 327
60 J. P.
Hingham
v.
416
236 49 917
87 L. T.
350, 541
17 T. L. R.
21, 1243
no
Hitchcock
.
;
.
37 Giddings (1817)4 Price, 135; 18 R. R. 725 Hitchman v. Stewart (1855) 24 L. J. Ch. 690 3 Drew. 271 3 Eq, R. 838 ; 156.297 I Jur. (N. S.) 839 ; 3 W. R. 464 i H. & H. 8 L. J. Ex. Hitchman v. Walton (1838) 4 M. & W. 409 374 642, 645 31 697 Hix V. Gardiner (1614) 2 Bulstr. 195 Hoares. Metropolitan Board of Works (1874) L. R. 9 Q. B. 296; 43 L. J. 386, 73 M. C. 6s ; 29 L. T. 804 9^8,957 Hoares. Parker (1788) 2 T.R. 376, 525 Hoare o.Silverlock (1848) 12 Q. B. 628 17 L. J. Q. B. 306 ; 12 Jur. 695
; ; ; ; ;
,
...
Digitized
by Microsoft
CXXXIV
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
.
Hobbs u. L. & S. W. Ry. (1875) L. R. 10 Q. B. Ill Hobbs V. Wayet (1887) 36 Ch. D. 256 57 L. T. 225 36 W. R. 73 Hobson 0. Bass (1871) I.. R. 6 Ch. 792 19 W. R. 992 Hobson V. Blackburn (1822) i Add. 274 Hobson V. Cowley (1858) 27 L. J. Ex. 205 6 W. R. 334 Hobson V. Thelluson (1867) L. R. 2 Q. B. 642 8 B. & S. 476 36 L.
;
;
29s 294
1246 215
J,
Q.B,
302; 16L. T. 837; isW. R. 1037 53 Hobson o. Todd (1790) 4 T. R. 71 2 R. R. 335 327 Hochster i>. De la Tour (1853) 2 El. & Bl. 678 22 L. J. Q, B.455; I 7 Juf' I 20, 208 972 I W. R. 469 Hocking o. Matthews (1671) i Ventr. 86 i Lev. 292 11 Sid. 463 Keb. 636 489 Hodges 11. Hodges [1899] i Ir. R. 480 1417 Hodges V. Webb [1920] 2 Ch. 70 89 L. J. Ch. 273 23 L. T. 80 36 T. L. R. 311 480 Hodgeson v. Bussey (1740) 2 Atk. 89 9 Mod. 236 580 Hodgkinson, Ex parte (18 15) 19 Ves. 291 G. Cooper, 99 13 R. R. 199 96 Hodgkinson v. Crowe (1875) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 662 44 L. J. Ch. 680 i 33 L. T. 388 23 W. R. 885 633 Hodgson, Re (1885) 31 Ch. D. 177 55 L. J. Ch. 241 ; 34 W. R. 127 54 L. T. 222 C. A. 155, 1368 Hodgson V. Bective (Earl) (1863) i H. & M. 376 32 L. J, Ch. 489 ; 9 L. T. 18 2 N. R. 233 1271 Hodgson o. Hodgson [190c] P. 233 74 L. J. P. 140 93 L. T. 446 ; 53 W. R. 623 ; 21 T. L. R. 601 1195 Hodgson o. Scarlett (1818) i B. & Aid. 232 512 Hodgson V. Sidney (1866) L. R. i Ex. 313 4 H. & C. 492 35 L. J. Ex. 182 12 Jur. (N. S.) 694 14 L. T. 624 14 W. R. 923 366, 367 Hpdkinson o. L. & N. W. Ry. (1884) 14 Q. B. D. 228 32 W. R. 662 HodsoH V. Baxter (1858) E. B. & E. 884 28 L. J. Q. B. 61 4 Jur. (N. S.) 506 6 W. R. 686 523 Hodsoll V. Stallebrass (1840) 11 A. & E. 301 3 P. & D. 200 9 Car. & P. 63; 8 D. P. C. 482; 9 L- J. Q.B. 132 373,477 Hodsoll B. Taylor (1873) L. R. 9 Q. B. 79 43 L. J. Q. B. 14 29 L. T. 534; 22 W. R. 89 371, 469 Hodson, i? (1818) 3 Madd. 138 1405 Hodson . Pare [1899] i Q. B. 445 68 L. J. Q. B. 309 80 L. T. 13 47 ." W. R. 241 512 Hodson v. The Tea Co. (1880) 14 Ch. D. 859 ,49 L. J. Ch. 234 28 W. R. IO(2 458 Hogan o. Page (1798) I Bos. & P. 337 118 Holbird o. Anderson (1793) 5 T. R. 235 1064 B. 489 Holden v. Thompson [1907] 2 K. 76 L. J. K. B. 889 97 L. T. 138 23 T. L. R. 529 496, 498 Holder o. Coates (1827) Moo. & M. 112 780 Holder d. Sulyard v. Preston (1769) 2 Wils. K. B. 400 595 868 Holder 11. Soulby' (i860) 8 C. B. N. S. 254 244 Holder v. Taylor (1614) Hob. 12 635 Holderness v. Collinson (1827) 7 B. <fe C. 212 i M. & Ry. 6 L. J. (O. S.) 55 K. B. 17; 31 R. R. 174 205,962 Holdsworth v. Goose (i860) 29 Beav. in 30 L. J. Ch. 188 4 L. T. 196 7jur. (N. S.)3oi"; 9W. R. 443 873: Hole, Re [1906] i Ch. 673 . 75 L. J. Ch. 362 94 L. T. 451 553 Hole V. Bradbury (1879) 48 L. J. Ch. 673 12 Ch. D. 886 41 L. T. 250 28 W. R. 39 . \. 141
.
......
;
;
".
..
; ;
.
.251
...
.......
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Hole Hole
V,
cxxxv
PAGE
52C. A
o.
Ch. 293
63 L. J. Ch. 469
;
7 R. 84
70 L. T.
372
Sittingbourne Ry. (i86i) 6 H. & N. 488 30 L. J. Ex. 81 ; 3 L. T. 750 ; 9 W. R. 274 Holford, Re [1894] 3 Ch. 30 ; 63 L. 70 L. T. 777 ; 42 W. R. 563 J. Ch. 637 7 R. 304 C. A
; ; ;
354
"35
Holford V. Acton Urban District Council [1898] 2 Ch. 240 67 L. J. Ch. 636 ; 78 L. T. 829 128 Holfordn. Bai]ey(i846)8Q. B. 1000; 16L. J. Q. B. 68; 10 Jur. 822 719,720 Holford -u. Bailey (1849) 13 Q. B. 426; 18 L. J. Q. B. 109; 13 Jur. 278 327, 381 Holford B. Hatch (1779) i Doug. 1779 627 Holland o. Boins (1586) 2 Leon. 121 911 Holland v. Hatton {1697) Carth. 414 642 Holland v. Idea! Bedding Co. [1907] 2 Ch. 157 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 441 96 L. T. 774 ; 23 T. L. R. 467 14 Mans, n 3 1057 Holland 0. Worley (1884) 26 Ch. D. 578 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 268 50 L. T. 526; 32 W. R. 749 49 J. P. 7 373 Holies V. Wyse (1693) 2 Vern. 289 831 Hollidav v. National Telephone Co. [1899] 2 Q. B. 392 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 1016 ; 81 L. T. 252 ; 47 W. R. 658 C. A.' . 354, 355 HoUingshead, Re (1888) 37 Ch. D. 61; i 58 L. T, 758; 57 L. J. Ch. 400 36 W. R. 660 76, 1384 HoUins V. Fowler (1875) L. R. 7 H. L. 757, 767 44 L. J. Q. B. 169 ; 33 L- T. 73 416, 419 HoUis' Hospital Case [1899] 2 Ch. 540 68 L. J. Ch. 673 81 L. T. 90 47 W. R. 691 45, 795, 1075 Hollis V. Palmer (1836) 3 Scott, 265 ; 2 Bmg. (N. C.) 713 ; 2 Hodges, 55 ;
.
"
'
Hollis
839
Holme
Holmes Holmes Holmes Holmes Holmes
V.
& G. 270 ; 23 L. J. Ch. 529 ; 18 Jur. 2 W. R. 305 Brunskill (1877) 3 Q. B. D. 495; 47 L. J. Q. B. 610; 38 L. T.
' .
.......
116 1363
36
838
z;.
9 L. J. Ch. 217
;
Bellingham (1859) 7 C. B. N. S. 329 Blogg (l8l8) 2 Moo. 552 19 R. R. 445 v. Coghill (1802) 7 Ves. 499 2 Jur. v. Godson (1856) 25 L. J. Ch. 317 ; 8 De G. M. & G. 152 ; C. A. (N. S.) 383 ; 4 W. R. 415 ; 20 Beav. 193 559, 931 Holmes o. Mather (1875) L. R. 10 Exch. 261 44 L. J. Ex. 176 33 L. T. 361 ; 23 W. R. 364 329, 380, 432 Holmes o. Millage [1893] i Q. B. 551 ; 62 L. J. Q. B. 380 ; 68 L. T. 205 57 C. A 1057 J. P. 551; 41 W.R. 354; 4 R. 332 Holmes v. Simmons (1868) L. R. i P. & D. 523 ; 37 L. J. P. & M. 58 18 L. T. 770 ; 16W. R. 1024 1163,1171 Holmes p. Wilson (1839) 10 A. & E. 503. 372 691 Holroyd v. Breare (1819) 2 B. & Aid. 473 2i R. R. 361 . Holroyd o. Marshall (1862) 10 H. L. C. 191 ; 33 L. J. Ch. 193 ; 7 L. T. 172 II W. R. 171 940 9 Jur. (N. S.) 213 60 Sol. Jo. 640 Holt, Re (1916) 85 L. J. Ch. 779 ; 115 L. T. 73 1396 Holt . Ely (1853) I E. & B. 795 5 17 Jur. 892 319 1310 Holt o. Frederick (1726) 2 P. Wms. 356 Holyland v. Lewin (1884) 26 Ch. D. 266 51 L. T. 14^ 53 L. J. Ch. 530 1287,1288 3Z W. R. 443 C. A
v. .
.......
....
. . . .
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxxxvi
TABLE OF CASES
FACE
Holywell Union v. Halkyn Drainage Co. [1895] A. C. 126 ; 64 L. J. M. C. . 113 i II R. 98 ; 71 L. T. 818 ; 59 J. P. 566H. L. (E.) Home V. Bentinck (1820) 2 Brod. & B. 130 ^12 Hone's Trusts, Re (1883) 22 Ch. D. 663 52 L. J. Ch. 295 ; 48 L. T. 266 ; 31 1288 W. R. 379 Honjrwood V. Honywood (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 306 ; 43 L. J. Ch. 652 ; 30 L.T. 671*; 22W. R. 749 574,787,789 Hood 0. Hood (1867) 26 L. J. Ch. 616 3 Jur. (N. S.) 684 5 W. R. 747 . 839 Hood 0. Stokes (1753) i Wils. 341 . 1093 Hood-Barrs v. Cathcart [1894] 2 Q. B. 559 ; 63 L. J. Q. B. 602 45 Hood-Barrs . Heriot [1896] A. C. 174 ; 65 L. J. Q. B. 352 ; 60 J. P. 612 ; 74 L- T. 3S3 44 W. R. 481 45, 1055 Hood-Barrs v. Heriot [1897] A. C. 177 ; 66 L. J. Q. B. 356 76 L. T. 299 ; 46 45 W. R. 507 Hoop, The (1799) I C. Rob. 196 31A, 313 Hooper v. Herts [1906] i Ch. 549 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 253 94 L. T. 324 ; 54 W. R. . 1005, 1006 350 ; 13 Mans. 85 C. A. Hooper 0. Lane (1857) 6 H. L. C. 443 530 Hooper v. L. & N. W. Ry. (i88o) 50 L. J. Q. B. 102 ; 43 L. T. 570 ; 29 W. R. 241 ; 45 J- P- 223 429 Hooper v. Mayor of Exeter (1887) 56 L. J. Q. B. 457 Hooper v. Smart (1875) i ,Ch. JD. 90 ; 45 L. J. Ch. 99 ; 33 L. T. 499 ; 24 W. R. 152 1409 Hooper . Sumniersett (1810) Wight. 16. . 1344 Hope V. Corporation of Gloucester (1855) 7 De G. M. & G. 647 ; 25 L. J. Ch. 6i6 145 ; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 27 4 W. R. 138 Hope V. Evered (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 339 ; 55 L. J. M. C. 146 ; 55 L. T. 320 ; 34W. R. 742; 16 Cox, C. C. 112 492 Hope V. Glendinning [191 1] A. C. 419 80 L. J. P. C. 193 ; 48 Sc. L. R. 962 775 Hope o. Hope (1854) 4 De G. M. & G. 328 ; 23 L. J. Ch. 682 z W- R. 698 1219 Hope I). Hope [1892] 2 Ch. 336 61 L. J. Ch. 441 66 L. T. 522 ; 40 W. R. 522 . 1314, 1315 Hope 5. Leng (1907) 23 T. L. R. 243 C. A 513 Hope V. Osborne [1913] 2 Ch. 349 82 L. J. Ch. 457 ; 109 L. T. 41 ; 77 P. 317 II L. G. R. 825 ; 57 Sol. Jo. 702 T. L. R. 606 . 29 398 J. Hope o. Walter [1900] i Ch. 257 69 L. J. Ch. 166 ; 82 L. T. 30 C. A. 127 JKe (1909) 25 T. L. R. 369 Hope Johnstone, .1110 Hopkins, parte (1732) 3 P. Wms. 152 1215,1226 Hopkins, Re, Williams v. Hopkins (1881) 18 Ch. D. 370; 45 L. T. 117; 29 W. R. 767 C. A. 1387 Hopkins, Re, Dowd v. Hawtin (1881) 19 Ch. D. 61 C. A. . 30 W. R. 601 1332 Hopkins v. G. N. Ry. (1877) 2 Q, B. D. 224 46 L. J. Q. B. 265 ; 36 L. T. 898C. A 696 Hopkins V. Hopkins (1734) Cas. temp. Talb. 44 658 Hopkins V. Logan (1839) 5 M. & W. 241 7 D. P. C. 360 ; 8 L. J. Ex. 2i8 94 Hopkinson v. Gibson (1805) 2 Smith, 204 408 Hopkinson v. Richardson[i9i3] i Ch. 284 ; 82 L. J. Ch. 2i i ; 108 L. T. 501 ; : 1360 57 Sol. Jo. 265 Hopkinson v. Rolt (1861) 9 H. L. C. 514 ; 34 L. J. Ch. 468 ; 5 L. T. 90 7 Jur. (N. S.) 1209 ; 9 W. R. 900 817 Hopper p. Conyers (1866) L. R. 2 Eq. 549 12 Jur. (N. S.) 328 ; 14 W. R. , 6?8 1142
.......382 ......
.
....... ......
; ;
. .
.321
.....
. . . . ;
....
......
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES'
Hopwood
o.
cxxxvii
PAGE
(1859) 7 H. L. C. 728 ; 29 L. J. Ch. 747 ; 5 Jur. (N. S.) 897; r-ii^ 5 W. R. 331 Horbury Bridge Co., Re (1879) 11 Ch. D. 115 ; 48 L. J. Ch. 341 ; 40 L. T.
Hopwood
1283
9 237
1281
131
353 ; 27 W. R. 433 Horford v. Wilson (1807) i Taunt. 12 Horlock, Re [1895] i Ch. 516 64 L. J. Ch. 325 72 L. T. 223 ; 43 W. R. 410 13 R- 356 Horlock V. Beal [1916] i A. C. 486 ; 85 L. J. K. B. 602 1 14 L. T. 193 21 Com. Cas: 201 60 Sol. Jo. 236 32 T. L. R. 251 H. L. (E.) Home, Re (1888) 39 Ch. D. 84 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 790 ; 59 L. T. 580 37 W. R. 69 Horseman v. Abbey (1819) i J. & W. 381 ; 21 R. R. i88 . . Horsey Estate, Ltd. v. Steiger [1899] 2 Q. B. 79 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 743 80 L. T. 857; 47W. R. 6^4; 15T. L. R. 367 Horsford, In the Goods of {1%^^) L. R. 3 P. & M. 21 1 44 L. J. P. 9 ; 31 L. T. 553; a3W. R. 211 Horsley v. Chaloner (1750) 2 Ves. Sen. 83 Horsley v. Cox (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. App. 92 ; 38 L. J. Ch. 285 ; 20 L. T. 128 ; 17W. R. 596 Horsley 0. Style (1893) 69 L. T. 222 ; 4 R. 574 58 J. P. 38 ; 9 T. L. R. 605
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
.
884
975
628
1249 1419 1152
428,
.....
; ; . ;
Horton
v.
Timber Co. [1917] i 115 33 T. L. R. 86 61 Sol. Jo. 1 14 C. Horwood o. Smith (1788) 2 T. R. 750 ; i R. R. 613 2 Leach, C. C. 586 n. Hotchkys, Re (1886) 32 Ch. D. 408 ; 55 L. J. Ch. 546 ; 55 L. T. no 34 . W. R. 569C. A. Hotham o. East India Co. (1787) I T. R. 638 ; I R. R. 333 Houghton, Re [1904] i Ch. 622 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 317 ; 90 L. T. 252 ; 20 T. L. R.
Millar's
;
;
Horwood
495 837
L. T. 805
42 420
1130
.134
276; 52W. R. 505 Houghton, Re [1915] 2 Ch. 173 562; 31T. L. R. 427
1133,1411
;
84 L.
J.
Ch. 726
113 L. T. 422
59 Sol. Jo.
1277,1296
P. 150; 72 L. J. P; 31
;
Houghton
o.
Houghton [1903]
;
89 L. T. 76; 52
1190 238 342
W.
R. 272
19 T. L. R. 505
;
Houghton o. Matthews (1803) 3 B. & P. 485 Houlden v. Smith (1850) 14 Q. B, 841 19 L. J. Q. Hounsell v. Smyth (i860) 7 C. B. N. S. 73 1 29 L. J.
;
B. 170
C. P.
203
897 ; I L. T. 440 ; 8 W. R. 277 Household Fire Insurance Co. v. Grant (1879) 4 Ex. D. 216
...
332
91
65 L. J. Ch. 832; 75 L. T. 40; 45 R. 103 77 Howard v. Crowther (1841) 8 M. & W. 601 5 Jur. 91 ; 10 L. J. Ex. 355 366, 468 Fanshawe [1895] 2 Ch. 581 ; 64 L. J. Ch. 666; 73 L. T. 77; 43 Howard v. W. R. 645 13 R. 663 797, 980 815 Howard c. Harris (1683) 1 Vern. 190 206 Howard v. Harris (1884) i Cab. & El. 253 Howard o. Hopkyns (1742) 2 Atk. 371 139 619,643 Howards. Shaw (1841) 8 M. &W. 118 Howard -o. Woodward (1864) 5 N. R. 8 34 L. J. Ch. 47 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 139 1123; II L. T. 414; 13 W. R. 132 Howarth, Re [1909] 2 Ch. 19 ; 78 L. J. Ch. 687 100 L. T. 865 ; 53 Sol. Jo. 519C. A 994 1121 . . Howe D. Dartmouth (Earl) (1802) 7 Ves. 137; 6 R. R. 96 . . . 597 Howes, Howe (1686) I Vern. 415
How V. Planner (1666) Sid. 301 How V. Winterton [1896] 2 Ch. 626;
i
435
W.
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxxxviii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
R. 97 4 Tyr. 548 ; 3 L. J. Ex. 255 . Howley v. Knight (1849) 14 Q. B. 240 19 L. J. Q. B. 3 ; 14 Jur. 665 Hoyle, In re; Hoyle 0. Hoyle [1893] i Ch. 84 62 L. J. Ch. 182 67 L. T. 674 41 W. R. 81 D'Huart o. Harkness (see " D ").
V.
Jones (1834)
C.
M.
&
.......
;
27 Ch. D. 8q
. .
'
50 L. T. 573
.
32
126,136,137
693 298 976
290
(1886) 17 Q. B. D. 690"; 55 L. J. Q. B. 490; 59 L. T. . . . 3 Morrell, 246 ; 949, 955 Hubbuck, In the Estate of [1905] P. 129 ; 74 L. J. P. 58 ; 92 L. T. 665 ; 54 W. R. i6; 21 T. L. R. 333 1331 Hubbuck . Wilkinson '[1899] i Q. B. 86 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 34 ; 79 L. T. 429. 510 Huber, In the Goods of [1896] P. 209 ; 65 L. J. P. iig ; 75 L. T. 453 . 1242 Huckle V. Money (1763) 2 Wils. 205 370 Hudson, Re [1908] i Ch. 655 ; 77 L. J. Ch. 305 ; 98 L. T. 567 ; 24 T. L. R.
n-dhhsLid,
Ex parte
;
172 n.
35
W.
R. 2
.......
; ; ;
.
333
751
Hudson . Baxendale (1857) 2 H. &N. 575 27L.J.EX.93; 6W.R.83 250,251 Hudson V. Fawcett (1844) 7 Man. & G. 348 2 D. & L. 81 8 Scott (N. R.)
32
;
V. c.
Parker (1844) i Roberts (1851) 6 Exch. 697 20 L. J. Ex. 299 . . Spencer [1910] 2 Ch. 285 79 L. J. Ch. 506 103 L. T. 276
; ; ; .
. . .
Aid. 27 Rob. 14
&
.... .......
;
.>
24 R. R. 268
116 59
1259
359, 453
;
54
983, 1292
;
'
46 L.
J.
Q. B. 463
36 L. T. 492
. .
W:
Hughes
Britannia B. S. [1906] 2 Ch. 607 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 739 ; 91; ; .' 22 T. L. R. 806 . Hughes V. Griffith (1862) 13 C. B. N. S. 324 ; 32 I.. J. C. P. 47 . . Hughes 0. Lenney (1839) 5 M.' & W. 183 ; 2 H. & H. 13 ; 8 L. J. Hughes 11. Macfie (1863) 2 H. & C. 744 ; 33 L. J. Ex. 177 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 682; 9L. T. 513; 12W. R. 315
D.
.'
334 Parker (1841) 8 M. & W. 244 '. 186,557 o. Percival (1883) 8 App. Ca. 443 ; 52 L. J. Q. B. 719 ; 49 L. T. 189 31 W. R. 725 47 j. P. 772 59 Hughes . Wells (1852) 9 Hare, 749 16 Jur. 927 868 Hugh Stevenson & Sons 0. Aktien-Gesellschaft [1918] (see " S "). Hugo, In the Goods of (1877) 2 P. D. 73 46 L. J. P. 21 36 L. T. 518 ; 25 W.R. 396 1248 Huguenin v. Basely (1807) 14 Ves. 273 9 R. R. 148, 276 36 Huish, Re (1889) 43 Ch. D. 260 59 L. J. Ch. 135 62 L. T. 52 38 W. R. 1282 199 Huley's (Prior) Case (1344) Y. B. 18 Edw. HI, Mich. pi. 55, fo. 48 937 HuU & Selby Ry., Re (1839) 5 M. & W. 327 ; 8 L. J. Ex. 260 778, 779 Hulme 0. Hulme (1823) 2 Add. 27 .1188 Hulse, Re [1905] i Ch". 406 74 L. J. Ch. 246 92 L. T. 232 788, 1356 Hultono. Brown (1881)45 L. T. 343 29 W. R. 928 69 Hulton . Hulton (No. 2) [1916] 2 K. B. 642 ; 86 L." J. K. B. 51 115 L. T. 60 Sol. Jo. 695 T. L. R. 645 46 32 340 Htenble v. Hunter (1848) 12 Q. B. 350 17 L. J. Q. B. 310 ; 12 Jur. 1021 . 62, 64 Hilmirey v. Dale (1857) 7 El. & Bl. 266 (1858) E. B. & E. 1004 : 27 L. J. Q.B. 390; 5jur. (N. S.)i9i; 6W.R. 854 . ro5
Hughes Hughes
"
...
; .
. . .
......
;
. .
....
. . .
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Humfrey
v.
cxxxix
PAGE
Gery (1849) 7
C. B.
i
[1898]
843
;
67 L. J. Ch. 363
;
78 L. T. 518 92 L. T. 834
. .
46
1242
53
Morten [1905]
Ch. 739
74 L.
;
W.
J.
Ch. 370
R. 552
v. v.
Humphries
797
20 L. J. Q. B. 10 K. B. 752 85 L. T. 103
; . . .
781
Humphrys
49 W.
R.
o.
612 C. A
;
70 L. J.
42,1216,1217
.
Humphrys
Pratt (1831) 5 Bligh (N. S.) 154 531 Hunt, In the Goods o/[i896] P. 288 66 L. J. P. 8 ; 45 W. R. 236 1332 Hunt . Bate (1568) Dy. 272. 94 Hunt V. Bishop (1853) 8 Exch. 675 ; 22 L. J. Ex. 337 796 Hunt V. G. N. Ry. [1891] 2 Q. B. 189 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 498 ; 55 J. P. 648 527 Hunt V. Luck [1902] i Ch. 428 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 239 86 L. T. 68 ; 50 W. R. 18 T. L. R. 265 C. A 291 759 Hunt V. Remnant (1854) 9 Exch. 635 23 L. J. Ex. 135 18 Jur. 335 ; 2 W. R. 276 Hunt V. Star Newspaper Co. [1908] 2 K. B. 309 77 L. J. K. B. 732 98 L. T. 629 24 T. L. R. 452 509,510 Hunter B. Edney (1881) 10 P. D. 93 27,1175 Hunter v. Hunter [1905] P. 217 74 L. J. P. 157 ; 93 L. T. 451 53 W. R. . .1192 666; 21 T. L. R. 602 Hunter v. Nockolds (1849) i Mac. & G. 640 19 L. J. Ch. 177 14 Jur. 256 I Hall & Tw. 644 996 Hunter ti. Walters (1871) L. R. 7 Ch. 75 41 L. J. Ch. 175 25 L. T. 765 20 W. R. 218 756,1141 Hunter's and Hewlett's Contract [1907] i Ch. 46 76 L. J. Ch. 26 ; 95 L. T.
........ ....
. ; ; ;
. .
.796
...
674 Hunt-Foulston v. Furber (1876) 3 Ch. D. 285 24 W. R^756 Huntley's Case (1572) Dyer, 326 a Huntley v. Ward (1859) 6 C. B. N. S. 514 6 Jur. (N. S.) 18 Hurdman v. N. E. Ry. (1878) 3 C. P. D. 174 47 L. J. C. P. 368 339 26 W. R. 489 C. A
; .
. . .
.
.
-991
573
656, 1089
519, 528
38 L. T.
. .
80 L. J. Ch. 29 Hurlbatt, Re [1910] 2 Ch. 553 103 L. T. 585. Hursello. Bird (1891) 65 L. T. 709 Hurst V. Beach (1819) 5 Madd. 356 21 R. R. 304 Hurst V. Holding (1810) 3 Taunt. 32 12 R. R. 587 Hurst V. Picture Theatres, Ltd. [1915] i K. B. i'; 83 L. J. K. B. 1837 L. T. 972 58 Sol. Jo. 739 30 T. L. R. 642 C. A. Hussey (P. Hussey (1820) 5 Madd. 44; 21 R. R. 275 Hutchins v. Hutchins (1845) Bigelow, Leading Cases on Torts, 207 Hutchinson v. Chambers (1758) i Burr. 590
; ; ; ; . . ; ;
393 1081
1343 1275
236
;
in
386, 435
.
Hutchinson
1).
L. T. 103
Hutchinson v. 19 L. J. Ex. 296 ; 6 Ry. ; Cas. 580 448, 449 Hutley V. Hutley (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 1 12 42 L. J. Q. B. 52 28 L. T. 63 ; 21 W. R. 479 498) 499 Hutt, i2e(i839)7D. P. C. 690; 3 Jur. 1105 593 62, 63 Hutton V. Bullock (1874) L. R. 9 Q. B. 572 30 L. T. 648 ; 22 W. R. 956 L. J. Ch. 689 ; 49 L. T. Hutton V. West Cork Ry. (1883) 23 Ch. D. 654 52 221 420 31 W. R. 827 Huzzey v. Field (1835) 2 C. M. & R. 432 i Gale, 166 5 Tyr. 855 ; 4 L. J. 695) 696 Ex. 239 . 928 Hyde o. Parratt (1695) i P. Wms. i 2 Vern. 331
; ; . ; ; ; ; . ;
42 L.
J. C. P.
260
29
....
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxl
TABLE OF
v.
(^ASES
PAGE
Hyde Hyde
470, 472
5
v.
Trent
&
T. R. 389
Esp. 36
2 R. R. 620
'.251
88,90
35
91 L. T. 361
;
Hydec. Wrench*(i84o)
P. 403
f^ L. J. P. 106
;
20 T. L. R.
1
187
195
Hyman v. Nye (1881) 6 Q. B. D. 685 44 L. T. 919 Hyman v. Van den Bergh [1907] 2 Ch. 516 76 L.
aj^me(i[i9o8]
I.
I
45
J. P. 554.
Ch. 167;
77L.
J.
1163 (1838) 2 Jur. 463; 3 Myl. cfe C. 471 Stuart (1787) i T. R. 748 525 Ibbotson c. Peat (1865) 3 H. & C. 644 ; 34 L. J. Ex. 118 ; 11 Jur. (N. S.) 480,770 394; 12L. T. 313; 13 W. R. 691 Ideal Bedding Co. -v. Holland [1907] 2 Ch. 157 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 441 ; 96 L. T. 1062, 1063, ii'?8 774 ; 23 T. L. R. 467 ; i4Manson, 113 . . Idle 0. Cqok (1705) i P. Wma. 70 . . . Iggulden V. May (1806) 7 East, 237 617 Illidge, Re (1883) 24 Ch. D. 654; (1884) 27 Ch. D. 478 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 991 ; 51 L. T. 523; 33 W. R. 18 C. A 1372,1380 . Ilott V. Wilkes (1820) 3 B. & Aid. 304 ; 22 R. R. 400 . 446, 775 Imperial Gas Light & Coke Co. o. Broadbent (1859) 7 H. L. C. 600 ; 29 L. J. (E.) Ch. 377 ; 5 Jur. (N: S.) i3I9-H. L. 401 Imperial Loan Co. o. Stone [1892] i Q. B. 599 ; 61 L. J. Q. B. 449 ; 66 L. T. 26 556 ; 56 J. P. 436 Imray v. Oakshette [1897] 2 Q. B. 218 ; 66 L. J. Q. B. 544 ; 76 L. T. 632 ;
I'anson
o.
'
C, ^Aiparw
....
'.
.666
45 W. R. 68i C. A. 759, 799 Incandescent Light Co. 1). Cantelo (1895) 12 R. P. C. 262 927 Ince, In the Goods 0/ (1877) 2 P! D. 1 1 1 ; 46 L. J. P. 30 36 L. T. 5 19 25 W. R. 396 1254 20 L. T. [259 ; 17 Inchbald v. Barrington ) (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. App. 388 Inchbald v. Robinson ) W. R. 459 375, 401, 402 Incledon v. Northcote (1746) 3 Atk. 430 1400 Income Tax Commissioners o. Pemsel [1891] A. C. 531 ; 61 L. J. Q. B. 265 ; P. 805 ,65 L. T. 621 ; 55 J. 916 Indermaur 0. Dames (1866) L. R. i C. P. 274 36 L. J. Ex. 181 ; 16 L. T. 293; 15W. R. 434 332 Ingham, Re [1893] 1 Ch. 352 62 L. J. Ch. 100 68 L. T. 152 41 W. R. 760, 1408 235 ; 3 R. 126 Ingle V. Vaughan Jenkins [1900] 2Ch. 368 69 L. J. Ch. 618 83 L. T. 155 ; 48 W. R. 684 Inman, Re [1903] i Ch. 241 88 L. T. 173 72 L. J. Ch. 120 51 W. R.
; ;
....
.....
; ; ; . . ; ;
.553
1121
188
579, 1304
iJe [191 5]
i
Inman,
161
Ch.
87
84
I..
J. Ch.
309
1 1
2 L. T. 240
(1873) L. R. 15 Eq. 260 ; 21 W. R. 433 Innes v. Sayer (1849) 7 Ha. 377 ; i8 L. J. Ch. 274 ; 13 Jur. 402 Inues V. Wylie (1844) 1 C. & K. 257 International Contract Co., i?e (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 525 International Tea Stores v. Hobbs [1903] 2 Ch. 165 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 543
Inman
o.
Inman
....
.
59 Sol. Jo.
...
;
88
L.T. 725; 5iW:R. 615 Irish, In re; Irish v. Irish (1888) 40 Ch. D. 49
R. 231 IrishClubCo.,iJe[i9o6]
58 L.
J.
Ch. 279
60 L. T.
224; 37W.
W. N.
127
2io ,008
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Irish
cxli
Land Commission v. Grant (1884) L. R. 10 App. Ca. 14 ; ;2 L. T. 228 ; 33 W. R. 357 73, 843 . Irons V. Smallpiece (1819) 2 B. & Aid. 551 ; 21 R. R. 395. 939 Irvine c. Watson (1879) 5 Q. B. D. 102 ; 49 L. J. Q. B. 239 ; 42 L. T. 51 ;
.
28 W. R. 353 Irving V. Veitch (1837) 3 M. & W. 107 ; 7 L. J. Ex. 25 ; Mur. & H. 313 Irwin, Re [1904] z Ch. 752 73 L. J. Ch. 832 53 W. R. 200 Irwin V. Brandwood (1864) 2 H. & C. 960 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 370 ; 33 L. J. Ex. 257 ; 9 L. T. 722 12 W. R. 438 Irwin V. Caruth [1916] P. 23 85 L. J. P. 25 ; 32 T. L. R. 193 ; sub nom. In the Estate 0/ Millar, Irwin v. Caruth, 114 L. T. 373 60 Sol. Jo. 210
.
. .
63 322 754
525
1330,
467,468 (1809) II East, 23 868 V. Farrer (i8ii) 19 Ves. 86 Isaacs, Re [1894] 3 Ch. 506 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 815 ; 71 L. T. 386 ; 42 W. R. 685 ; 1361 8 R. 660 Isaack v. Clark (161 5) 2 Bulstr. 306 ; Moore, 841 ; Godb. 21 a ; Roll. Rep.
Irwin Irwin
9.
Dearman
......
;
1332
Iseham
i99>205. 419. 422,920 608, 609 Morrice (1628) Cro. Car. 109 Isenberg v. East India House Co. (1863) 3 De G. & S. 272 ; 33 L. J. Ch, 392; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 221 ; 9 L. T. 625; 15 W. R. 450; 3 N. R, 376 345 M. & W. 347 ; 2 D. (N. S.) 548 ; 12 L. J, Isherwood v. Whitmore (1843) 106 Ex. 318 ; 7 Jur. 535 12 M. & W. 20 n. . 684 Islington Market Bill, Re (1835) 3 CI. & F. 513 456 Ismay & Co. v. Williamson [1908] A. C. 437 616 Isteedii. Stonelay (1580) I And. 82 728 Ive's Case (1597) 5 Rep. II b 806 Ch. 373 Ives V. Brown [1919] 2 Ch. 314 ; 88 L. 59
*.
...
; .
J.
Ives
Lucas (1823)
v.
C.
&
P. 7
;
53'
Ivimey
Stocker (1866) L. R. i Ch. App. 396 (N. S.) 419 ; 14 L. T. 427 ; 14 W. R. 743
35 L. J. Ch. 467
12 Jur,
744
fo.
J. L. 0.
J. S.,
Jackman
Jackson, 194 Jackson,
Hoddesdon (1594)
Re Re
....
;
14
50 L. T. 18 56 L. T. 562
32
35
W.
R,
1289
(1887) 34 Ch. D. 732
:
56 L. J. Ch. 593
W.
R.
157, 1091 ir
646
Jackson, In the Goods of [1892] P. 257 ; 61 L. J. P. 126 ; 67 L. T. 327 56 J. P. 457 Jackson's & Haden's Contract, In re [1905] i Ch. 603 ; [1906] i Ch. 412 75 L. J. Ch. 226 ; 94 L. T. 418 ; 54 W. R. 434 Jackson v. Cummins (1839) W. & M. 342 ; 8 L. J. Ex. 265 ; 3 Jur. 436
.')
339
187
205,
Jackson Jackson
Ch. 947
;
72 L.
J. Ch.
761
;
L.T.507;
;
960, 964 19
"39
77 L.
J. P.
147
;
24 T. L. R. 674
52
117s
Jackson v. Normanby Brick Co. [1899] i Ch. 438 80 L. T. 482 ; 68 L, J. Ch 407 C. A R. Jackson v. Rainford Coal Co. [1896] 2 Ch. 340 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 757 ; 44 W.
Sol. Jo.
v.
376
1007
554 Jackson
249
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxlii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
v. v.
Jackson Jackson
C. P. 125 ; 44 L. J. 131, 146 31 L. T. 789 ; 23 W. R. 169 ; 2 Asp. M. C. 435 . ; Jackson v. Watson [1909] 2 K. B. 193 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 587 ; 100 L. T. 799 ; 53 Sol. Jo. 447 ; 25 T. L. R. 454 473
359
.
C. P. 27
Jacob V. Lawrence (1879) 14 Cox, C. C. 321 Jacobs V. Cr6dit Lyonnais (1884) 53 L. J. Q. B. 156
L. T. 194
;
......
;
12 Q. B. D. 589
50
32
W.
R.
5
761 C. A
;
Jacobs Jacobs
V.
Latour (1828)
Bing. 130
V. Seward (1872) L. R. 5 H. L. T. 185 ; 18 W. R. 953 387, 418 . . 525 Jaines 1). Brook (1846) 9 Q. B. 7 ; 16 L. J. Q. B. 17 ; lo Jur. 541 816 James v. James (1873) L. R. 16 Eq. 153 ; 42 L, J. Ch. 386; 21 W. R. 522 .
James James
o.
v.
58 L. J. Ch. 355
W.
James James James
v.
R. 279
53
J.
P. 628
v.
6 L. J. Ex. 6 Nev. & M. (K. B.) 282 260 lo R. R. 626 Jansen v. Brown (1807) i Camp. 41 Janson v. Driefontein Mines [1902] A. C. 484 71 L. J. K. B. 857 87 L. T. 372 51 W. R. 142 7 Com. Cas. 268 ; 18 T. L. R. 796 H. L. (E.) .
v.
; ; ; ;
;
............ ....
; ; ; ; ;
697
37,
60 L. T. 212
37
31A, 31B, 42
Janvier v. Sweeney [1919] 2 K. B. 316 88 L. J. K. B. 1231 ; 121 L. T. 179 63 Sol. Jo. 430 35 T. L. R. 360 C. A 454, 523 Jaques v. Millar (1877) 6 Ch. D. 153 47 L. J. Ch. 544 ; 37 L. T. 151 ; 25 W. R. 846 614 Jarmain v. Hooper (1843) 6 M. & G. 827 i D. & L. 769 ; 7 Scott, N. R. 663 8 Jur. 127 531 Jarrah Co. v. Samuel [1904] A. C. 323 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 526 ; 90 L. T. 731 ; 52 W. R. 673 20 T. L. R. 536 II Mans. 276 831, 959 Jarrett v. Aldarn (1870) L. R. 9 Eq. 463 39 L. J. Ch. ^49 22 L. T. 192 ; 18 W. R. 511 . 35 Jay V. Johnstone [1893] i Q. B. 189 62 L. J. Q. B. 128 ; 68 L. T. 129 57 4 R. 196 C. A 986 J. P. 309; 41 W. R. 161 Jeffereys 0. Small (1683) i Vern. 216 . 1090 ' Jefferson v. Jefferson (1682) Lev. 130 . 667 Jeffery, Re (J914) i Ch. 375 ; 83 L. J. Ch. 251 ; 1 10 L. T. 1 1 1087 58 Sol. Jo. 120 Jeffery'sTrusts, i?e(i866)L. R. 2Eq. 68; 3S L. J. Ch. 426 .1135 Jeffreys v. Jeffreys (1841) 3 Atk. 120 96 Jeffries v. G. W. Ry. Co. (1856) 5 E. & B. 802 25 L. J. Q. B. 107 ; z Jur. (N. S.) 230 ; 4 W. R. 201 412, 421 Jeffryes v. Evans (1865) 19 C. B. N. S. 246 34 L. J. C. P. 261 ; 11 Jur. (N. S.) 584 ; 13 L. T. 72 13 W.'R. 864 7^2)723 Jegon 0. Vivian (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 742 ; 40 L. J. Ch. 175 ; 22 L. T. 7 18 W. R. 162 767 Jekyll V. Moore (1806) 2 Bos. & P. N. R. 341 6 Esp. 63 512 Hayward [;905] 2 K. B. 460 74 L. J. K. B. 717 53 W. R. 686 ; 92 Jelks V. L. T. 692 ; 21 T. L. R. 527 343 Jell V. Douglas (1821) 4 B. & Aid. 374 23 R. R. 310 157 Jemmett's and Guest's Contract [1907] i Ch. 629 76 L. J. Ch. 367 884 18 L. J. Q. B. 274 Jenkins v. Hutchinson (1849) 13 Q. B. 744 60 13 Jur. 763 Jenkins v. Jones (1866) L. R. 2 Eq. 323 3s L. J. Ch. 520 14 L. T. 540 : 12 ." 14 W. R. 665 Jur. (N. S.) 368 1264
; ; ; ;
....
; . . . .
.
.......
; . . ; ; ;
.
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
*
cxliii
PAGE
Jenkins v. Jones (1882) 9 Q. B. D. 128 51 ; 30 W. R. 668 C. A Jenkins o. Morris (1880) 14 Ch. D. 674 C. Jenkins v. Price [1907] 2 Ch. 229 ; 76 L. reversed [1908] i Ch. 10 77 L. J. Ch. 70 ; 14 Mans. 343 C. A Jenkins o. Tucker (1788) I H. Bl. 90
L. J. Q. B. 438
;
46 L. T. 795
.
A.
J.
.'
706 27
Ch. 507
;
41
23 T. L. R. 608 97 L. T. 734 ; 24 T. L. R.
;
-c. Vaughan (1856) 3 Drew. 419 2 Jur. (N. S.) 25 L. J. Ch. 338 109; 4 W. R. 214 1063 Jenner v. Turner (1880) 16 Ch. D. 188 ; 50 L. 42 J. Ch. 161 Jernies, Re (1909) 53 Sol. Jo. 376 1380 Jenning's & Gower's Case (1589) Cro. Eliz. 219 1332 Jennings v. Broughton (1853) 17 Beav. 234 22 L. 17 Jur. 905 J. Ch. 585 I W. R. 441 540 Jennings v. Jennings [1898] i Ch. 378 ; 67 L. J. Ch. 190 ; 77 L. T. 786 ; 46 W. R. 344 ; 14 T. L. R. 198 1031 Jennings v. Jordan (1881) L. R. 6 App. Ca. 698 51 L. J. Ch. 129 ; 45 L. T. 593 ; 30 W. R. 369 834 Jennings v. Rundall (1799) 8 T. R. 335 4 R. R. 680 25, 347 Jeuaure v. Delmege [1891] A. C. 73 60 L. J. P. C. 11 63 L. T. 814; 39 W. R. 388 55 J. P. 500 519 Jentleman's Case (1583) 6 Rep. II b 685,691 Millward (1782) 3 Doug. 73 Jerdon . 678 Jersey v. G. W. Ry. (1893) [1894] 3 Ch. 625 n. C. A 127 Jervis v. Wolferstan (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 18 1269 43 L. J. Ch. 809 ; 30 L. T. 452 Jesser v. Gifford (1767) 4 Burr. 2141 396, 681 Jesson v. Jesson (1691) 2 Vern. 256 1283, 1284 Jesson V. Wright (1820) 2 Bligh, i ; 21 R. R. i 660 Jessopp & Watson (1833) i Myl. & K. 665 ; 2 L. J. Ch. 197 . 1309 Jewis V. Lawrence (1869) L. R. 8 Eq. 345 1285 Jipks V. Edwards (1856) 11 Exch. 775 ; 4 W. R. 303 6ii Job V. Job (1877) 6 Ch. D. 562 ; 26 W. R. 206 1420 John V. John [1898] 2 Ch. 573 ; 67 L. J. Ch. 616 79 L. T. 362 47 W. R. 52; 14 T. L. R. 583 C. A. 1347 John Brothers v. Holmes [1900] i Ch. 188 69 L. J. Ch. 148 81 L. T. 771 ; 64 J. P. 152; 48 W. R. 236 834 Johns 0. Pink [1900] i Ch. 296 ; 69 L. J. Ch. 98 8 1 L. T. 712 ; 48 W. R. 246 ; 16 T. L. R. 70 632 Johnson, Re (1880) 15 Ch. D. 548 ; 49 L. J. Ch. 745 ; 43 L. T. 372 ; 29 W. R. 168 1416, 1417 . Johnson, i?e( 1 894) I Mans. 54 632 Johnson Johnson, Re [1904] i K. B. 134 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 220 ; 90 L. T. 61 ; . 52 W. R. 304 ; 1 1 Mans. 14 44, 577 . Johnson v. Baker (1825) 2 C. & P. 207 ; 31 R. R. 663 1402 Johnson v. Barnes (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 592 678 Johnson v. Barnes (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 527 ; 42 L. J. C. P. 259 29 L. T. 65 716 Johnson v. Burgess (1873) L. R. 15 Eq. 398 ; 42 L. J. Ch. 400 28 L. T. 188 ; 21 W. R. 453 864 Johnson v. Clark [1908] i Ch. 303 77 L. J. Ch. 127; 98 L. T. 129; 24 T. L. R. 156 904 Johnson v. Credit Lyonnais (1877) 47 L. J. C. P. 241 37 L. T. 657; 26 ' W. R. 195 . . . 33 Johnson v. Diprose [1893] i Q. B. 515 62 L. J. Q. B. 291 ; 4 R. 291 ; 68 L. T. W. R. 371 ; 57 J. P. 517-C. A 49 485 ; 41 loi . . . Johnson v. Dodgson (1837) 2 M. & W. 653 ; 6 L. J. Ex. 185
Jenkyn
...
....
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxliv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
v.
Emerson (1871)
L. R. 6 Exch. 329
40 L.
J.
Ex. 329
25 L. T.
Helleley (1864) 2 De G. J. & S. 446 ; 34 L. J. Ch. 179 ; ii L. T. 581 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 1041 ; 13 W. R. 220 Johnson 0. Hudson (1836) i H. & W. 680 ; 7 A..& E. 233 n. ; 5 L. J. K. B.
0.
.....
.
487,492
1031
95
. . . .
. v. v.
v.
. Johnson (1841) 4 Beav. 318 Johnson (1843) 3 Ha. 157 ; 13 L. J. Ch. 79 ; 8 Jur. 77 Kennett (1835) 3 My. & K. 624 reversing 6 Sim. 384 Marshall [1906] A. C. 409 75 L. J. K. B. 868 ; 94 L. T. 828
. ; . ;
.1312
. .
S6
1288 1410
22 455
'
T. L. R. 565
0.
18 L. J. Ex. 366
6 Railw. Cas.
Johnson Johnson
Ha. 160 ; 22 L. J. Ch. 1039 ; 17 Jur. 825 . (1853) o. Pickering [1908] i K. B. i ; 77 L. J. K. B. 13 ; 98 L. T. 68 ; 24 T. L. R. I J 14 Mans. 263 C. A. . Johnson . Pye (1666) i Sid. 258 Johnson o. Stear (1863) 15 C. B. N. S. 330 ; 33 L. J. C. P. 130 ; 9 L. T. 538 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 99 ; 12 W. R. 347 Johnston, Re (1884) 26 Ch. D. 538 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 645 ; 52 L. T. 44 ; 32 W. R.
v.
Newton
256 1404
924
348
956
634
Johnston, i?e [191 1]
v.
W. N. 234; 105 L. T. 701 iiii Consumers Gas Co. of Toronto [1898] A. C. 447 ; 2 Ch. 614 79 Johnston L.T.478; 67L. J. P.C. 33 328 Johnston v. G. W. Ry. [1904] 2 K. B. 250, 255 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 568 ; 50 W. R. 612; 91 L. T. 157; 20T. L. R. 455 C. A. 369,371,372 Johnston v. O'Neill [191 1] A. C. 552; 81 L. J. P. C. 17; 105 L. T. 587; 24 T. L. R. 545 H. L. (I.) [1912] I I. R. 61 ; 49 Sc. L. R. 638 702 Johnston 0. Salvage Association (1887) 19 Q. B. D. 458 57 L. T. 218 ; 36 W. R. 56 ; 6 Asp. M. C. 167 295 Johnston v. Sumner (1858) 3 H. & N. 261 27 L. J. Ex. 341 ; 4 Jur. (N. S.) 462 ; 6 W. R. 574 57,1181 Johnstone v. Cox (1881) 19 Ch. D. 17 ; 45 L. T. 657 ; 30 W. R. 114 C. A. 1052 Johnstone v. Milling (1886) 55 L. J. Q. B. 162 ; 16 Q. B. D. 460 ; 54 L. T. 629 ; 34 W. R. 238 50 J. P. 694C. A. 120, 146, 147 Johnstone 11. Sutton (1786) I T. R. 510 493 Joint Stock Discount Co. (see "Mann's Case"). Jolly V. Kine [1907] A. C. i 76 L. J. Ch. i 23 T. L. R. i 95 L. T. 656 H. L 4.03 Jolly V. Rees (1864) 15 C. B. N. S. 628 ; 33 L. J. C. P. 177 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 319; 18 L. T. 299; 12 W. R. 473
;
.....
. ;
578, 1264
'
'
Jolly V. Wills (1678) 2 Rep. in Cha. 72 Jones, Ex parte (1881) 18 Ch. D. 109 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 673
5 928
45 h. T. 193
29
W.
R. 747
Jones, Re (1898) 79 L. T. 154 1098 Jones, Re[i<)io] i Ch. 167 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 34 ; loi L. T. 549 . . . 562 V. Arthur (1840) 8 D. P. C. 442 Jones . . . 108, 109 ; 4 Jur. 859 . Joiies V. Ashburnham (1804) 4 East, 455 ; i Smith, 188 . . . 93, 95 Jones V. Barkley (1781) 2 Doug. 684 106, 134, 135 Jones o. Bonner (1848) 2 Exch. 230 ; 5 D. & L. 718 ; 17 L. J. Ex. 343 . 368 Jones V. Brown (1795) Peake, 233 477 Jones . Chapman (1S49) 2 Exch. 803 ; 2 D. & L. 907 ; 14 M. & W. 124 ; 14 L. J. Ex. 313 383,384 Jones o. ChappeU (1875).!. R. 20 Eq. 539, 543 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 658 . . 395,
25,348
.........
396, 790
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Jones
V.
cxlv
PAGE
Corporation of Liverpool (1885) 14 Q. B. D. 890 54 L. J. Q. B. 345 ; 33W. R. 551; 4qJ. P. 311 Jones V. Davies (1861) 7 H. & N. 507 552 Jones V. Dowle ^1841) 9 M. & W. 653 ; i D. (N. S.) 391 ; 11 L. J. Ex. 52 425 V. Evans (1876) 2 Ch. D. 420 Jones 1382 45 L. J. Ch. 751 ; 24 W. R. 778 ; Jones V. Festiniog Ry. (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 733 9 B. & S. 835 ; 37 L. J. Q. B. 214 ; 18 L. T. 902 ; 17 W. R. 28 345 Jones V. Financial Times (1909) 25 T. L. R. 677 ; 53 Sol. Jo. 677 515 60 L. J. Q. B. 464 Jones V. Foley (iSgi) i Q. B. 730 64 L. T. 538 ; 39 W.R. 510; 55 J. P. 521 383 . Jones . Gwynn (1713) 10 Mod. 214 Salk. 15. . 488 Jones V. Heavens (1877) 4 Ch. D. 636 ; 25 W. R. 460 139 Jones V. Heme (1759) 2 Wils. 87 524 Jones V. Hulton [1902] 2 K. B. 444 78 L. J. K. B. 937 ; loi L. T. 330 25 T. L. R. 597 501, 507, 508 Jones V. Humphreys [1902] i K. B. 10 ; 71 L. J. K. B. 23 50 W. R. 191 1050 Jones V. Jones (1858) 4 K. & J. 361 1319 Jones V. Jones (1872) L. R. 2 P. & M. 333 20 W. R. 320 affirmed-, 41 L. J. P. & M. 53 ; 26 L. T. 106 ; 20 W. R. 449 " 1201, Jones 0. Lavington [1903] i K. B. 253 72 L. J. K. B. 98 88 L. T. 223 51 W. R. 161 19 T. L. R. 77 635 i N. & P. 677 ; 6 L. J. K. B. Jones V. Littledale (1837) 6 A. & E. 469
.......
;
.
.351
.
.... .......
; . .
. .
.......
; ; ; .
.
169 80 L. J. Ch. 338 104 L. T. 53 ; Jones V. Llanrwst M. C. [191 1] i Ch. 393 75J. P. 99 Jones V. Menoneth Buildmg Society [1892] i Ch. 173 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 138 ; 65 L. T. 685 ; 40 W. R. 173 17 Cox C. C. 389 6 L. J. (O. S.) Ch. 26 28 R. R. 22. Jones V. Mudd (1827) 4 Russ. 118 Jones B. Peppercorne (1858) John. 430; 28 L. J. Ch. 158; 5 Jur. (N. S.) 140 ; 7 W. R. 103 Jones V. Pope (1667) Wms. Saund. 37, u. 2 2 Keb. 93 ; i Lev. 191 ; i 5id.
.
32
...
; ;
-771
42
119
.
..........
; ; ; ;
962
63 530 Jones c. Pritchard [1908] i Ch. 630; 77 L. J. Ch. 405; 98 L. T. 386; 24 T. L. R. 309 707, 709 Jones V. Richards (1837) 6 A. & E. 530 ; 2 Nev. & P. 747 ; Will. Woll. & Dav. 276 717 Jones V. Scottish Accident Insurance Co. (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 421 55 L. J. Q. B. 415 7 351 Jones . ScuUard [1898] 2 Q. B. 565 67 L. J. Q. B. 895 ; 79 L. T. 386 923 Jones V. Selby (1710) Pre. Cha. 300 i Man. & Ry. Jones V. Tanner (1827) 7 B. & C. 542 ; 6 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 71 1268 420 6 Jur. 348. 967, 968 11 L. J. Ex. 267 Jones V. Tarleton (1842) 9 M. & W. 675 Jones V. Victoria Graving Dock Co. (1877) 46 L. J. Q. B. 219 2 Q. B. D. 314 loi 36 L. T. 347 ; 25 W. R. 501 916 Jones c. Williams (1766) 2 Ambl. 651 385 Jones V. Williams (1843) M. & W. 176 12 L. J. Ex. 249 80 L. T. Jordeson 0. Sutton Gas Co. [1899] 2 Ch. 217 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 457 A. 403, 771, 781 815 ; 63 J. P. 692 ; 15 T. L. R. 374 11 L. J. Ex. 74 775 Jordin v. Crump (184O 8 M. & W. 782 5 Jur. 11 13 . 1191 Joseph V. Joseph (1865) 34 L. J. P. & M. 96 13 W. R. 872 51 L. T. 740 Joseph V. Lyons (1884) 15 Q. B. D. 280 ; 54 L. J. Q. B. i 933, 94i> 954 33 W. R. 145 C- A Jowitt . Union Cold Storage Co. [1913] 3 K. B. i ; 82 L. J. K. B. 890 ; 108 965 L. T. 724 ; 18 Com. Cas. 185 ; 57 Sol. Jo. 560 ; 29 T. L. R. 477
'
....... '.,..........
; ; ; ; . ;
.
C.l.
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxlvi
TABLE OF CASES
c.
Weeks [1891] 2 Q. B. 41 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 510 ; 65 L. T, 16 ; 39 R. 583 ; 55 J. P. 725 610,611,612,613 Joynt V. Cycle Trade Publishing Co. [1904] 2 K. B. 292 73 L. J. K. B. 752 ; 91 L. T. 15s 509 Jubber v. Jubber (1839) 9 Sim. 503 1263 Judson V. Etheridge (1833) i Cr. & M. 7^3 ; 2 L. J. Ex. 300 3 Tyr, 954 205,
Joyner
W.
964
Jupp, Re (1888) 39 Ch. D. 148 71Z
;
57 L. J. Ch. 774
:
'
59 L. T. 129
36
W.
R. 1087
b.
Reynolds (1854) 4
De
G. M.
&
;
G. 565
24 L.
J.
Ch. 321
Jur.
(N.
v. o.
1328 789
8 Scott (N.
&
L. 291
R.)495; 7 Man
&G.
'
94 . 215, 474 Kearley 0. Thomson (1890) 24 Q. B. D. 742 L. J. Q." B. 288 ; 63 L. T. 59 15b; 38 W. R. 614; 54 J. P. 804 43 Kearney v. Lloyd (1890) 26 L. R. Ir. 268 481 Kearney B. L. B. & S. C. Ry. (1871) L. R. 6 Q. B. 759 40 L. J. Q. B. 285 ; 24 L. T. 913 ; 20 W. R. 24 . 330 Kearsley o. Cole (1846) 16 M. & W. 128 ; 16 L. J. Ex. 115 299 Keat V. Allan (1707) 2Vern. 588 42,48 Keates 0. Earl Cadogan (1851) IQ C. B. 591 636 Keck V. Faber (1916) 60 Sol. Jo. 253 121 Keeble o. Hickeringill (1706) 1 1 East, 574, n. 39' Keech v. Hall (1778) i Do'ugl. 22 642, 646 Keech 0. Sandford (1726) Sel. Ca. in Ch. 61 2 Eq. Cas. Ahr. 741, pi. 7 1104, 1 1 23, 1124, 1125 Keen v. Priest (1859) 4 H. & N. 236 28 L. J. Ex. 157 f 7 W. R. 376 532, 533 Keeneo. Dilke (1849) 14EX. Ch. 388; 18 L. J. Ex. 440 413 Keene 11. Keene (1857) 3 C. B. N. S. 144 27 L. J. C. P. 88 118 Keene v. Thotfias [1905] i K. B. 136 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 21 ; 92 L. T. 19 53 W. R. 336 21 T. L. R. 2 223 Keighley's Case (1609) 10 Rep. 139 a 783 Keighley & Co. v. Durant [1901] A. C. 240 84 L. T, 70 L. J. K. B. 662
,13
495
Keane
.....
;
. .
.771
v. Watson (1849) 3 Ex. 716 ; 18 L. J. Ex. 339 Keigwin o. Keigwin (i 843) 3 Curt. 107 Keir o. Leeman (1844) 6 Q. B. 308 8 Jur. 824 13 L. J. Q. B. 259 Keith V. Garcia & Co. [1904] i Ch. 774 73 L. J. Ch. 411 go L. T. 395 W. R. 532 ; 20 T. L. R. 330 Kekewich 1). Manning (1851) i 0e G. M. & G. 176 21 L. J. Ch. 577
Keightley
54 157 123S
41
;
.......
; ; ; ; .
.
52
754
;
Jur. 6B5
Kelk
Pearson (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 809 24 L. T. 890 19 W. R. 665 Kelland v. Fulford (1887) 6 Ch. D. 491 47 L. J. Ch. 94 25 W. R. 606 Kelly o. Kelly (1870) L. R. 2 P. & M. 59 22 L. T. 308 39 L. J. P. & M. 28 18W. R. 767 Kelly V. Metropolitan Ry. [1895] i Q. B. 944 64 L. J. Q. B. 568 14 R. 417 72L. T. 551; 43 W. R.497; 59J. P. 437 Kelly : Sherlock (1866) L. R. i Q. B. 686 35 L. J. Q. B. 200 12 Tur. (N.S.) 937 6 B. & S. 480 Kelly 0. Tinling (1865) L. R. i Q. B. 699 12 Jur. (N. S.) 35 L. J. Q. B. 231 940; 13L. T. 255; 14W. R. 51
V.
; ;
;
....
;
1189
...
: ;
477
522
526
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Kelseyi'.
cxlvii
PAGE
(1881) 52 L. J. Ch. 34 Kemble v. Farren (iSzg) 6 Bing. 141 ; 3 M. & P. 425 ; 3 Car. & P. 623 7 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 258 ; 31 R. R. 366 Kemeys-Tynte, Re [1892] 2 Ch. 211 ; 61 L. J, Ch. 377; 66 L. T. 752; 40
;
Dodd
103
137
W. R.423
Kemp
574
;
Falk (1882) L. R. 7 App. Cas. 573 52 L. J. Ch. 167 ; 47 L. T. 454 31 W. R. 125 ; 5 Asp. M. L. C. I 922 Kemp V. Westbrook (1749) i Ves. Sen. 278 956 Kempster, Re [1906] i Ch. 446 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 286 94 L. T. 248 ; 54 W. R. 139^ 385 Kendall o. Hamilton (1879) 4 App. Cas. 504 48 L. J. C. P. 705 41 L. T. 418; 28 W. R. 97 64, 152, 155 Kennedy . Broun (1863) 13 C. B. N. S. 677 32 L. J. C. P. 137 g Jur. (N. S.) ng; 7L. T. 626; II W. R. 284 94 Kennedy v. Kennedy [1907] P. 49 76 L. J. P. 34 96 L. T. 476 ; 23 T. L. R.
V.
......
; ; ; ; ;
139
"79
v.
;
. .
Kennedy
Kingston (1821) 2 Jac. & W. 431 22 R. R. 197 875, 876 Kensington (Lord)i?c (1885) 29 Ch. D. 527 54 L. J. Ch. 1085 53 L. T. 19 33W. R. 68g 1154 Kensington (Baron), Re [1902] i Ch. 203 71 L. J. Ch. 170 85 L. T. 577 50W. R. 201; 18 T. L. R. 8g 1277 Kent V. Kent [igo2] P. 108 71 L. J. P. 50 86 L. T. 536 18 T. L. R. 2g3. .1247, 1250 Kent V. Rilev (1872) L. R. 14 Eq. igo 41 L. J. Ch. 56g ; 27 L. T. 263 20 1061 W. R. 852 _ _ Kent V. Shuckard (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 803 : L J. K B. I 24s Kenyon v. Hart (1865) 6 B. & S. 249 34 L. J. M'. C. 87 11 Jur. (N. S.) 602 II L. T. 733 381 13 W. R. 406 Keppell V. Bailey (1834) 2 My. & K. 517 Coop, temp. Brough. 2g8 670, 806
; ; ; .
. .
Ker
V.
Wauchope
v. v.
(i8ig)
Bligh, 1.
1278
Kerford
Mondel (1859) 28
Kermode
McDonald
;
967
App. 584
J.
37L.
;
J. Ch.
87g;i9
1264
:
17
.
W.
R. 4
;
Re
46 L.
Ch. 287
36 L. T. 356
W. R. 390 Kerr, In re (1889) 24 L. R. (Ir.) 59 C. A. 66 I.. J, Q. B 762 77 L. T. 344 Kerrison v. Smith [1897] 2 Q. B. 445 Kershaw, Re (i888) 37 Ch. D. 674 57 L. J. Ch. 599; 58L.T. 512; 36W.
;
.
R
1396 898
I2CO 1308
Fairthorne [1895] i Ch. 2ig 64 L. J. Ch. 184 ; 71 L. T. 755 43 R. 327 75 11 Kidderminster (Mayor) o. Hardwick {1873) L. R. 9 Ex. 13 L. J. C. P. 177 B. 364 i L. M. & P. 131 19 Kidgill V. Moor (1850) g C. 327,396,681 14 Jur. 790 135 Kidner. Stimpson (igi8) 35T. L. R. 63 C. A <;5 L. J. Ch. 185 34 Kilford V. Blaney (1885) 31 Ch. D. 56 54 L. T. 287 i3g4, i3g7 W. R. 109 C. A 52 90 L. T. 604 Kilgour V. Gaddes [1904]. i K. B. 457 73 L. J. K. B. 233 854 W, R, 438 ; 2(5 T. L. R. 240 C. A
Kibble
v.
W.
kz
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxlviii
TABLE OF CASES
Press Association [1893]
i
KJmber
Kinch
v.
(1825) 2 Sim. & S. 409 ; King, Re [1907] i Ch; 72 ; 76 L. J. Qh. King o. Bellord (1863) i H. & M. 343 ; 8L. T. 633; II W. R. 900 King B. BroWti & Co. [1913] 2 Ch. 416 ;
V.
62 L. J. Q. B. 152 Q. B. 65 P. 247.
Ward
.......
;
....
;
4 R. 95
516 659 1378
.
.
.
32 L.
J.
Ch. 646
New
82 L. J. Ch. 548
109 L. T. 69
57
754 29 T. L. R. 691 Denison (1813) ' V. & B. 260 ; 12 R. R. 227 V. England (1864) 4 B. & S. 782 33 L. J. Q. B. 145 9 L. T. 645 12 W. R. 308 Jur. (N. S.) 634 King *. Gillet (1840) 7 M. & W. 55 10 L. J. Ex. 164 King 0. Hoare (1844) 13 M. & W. 494 King . Jones (1814) 5 Taunt. 418 ; i Marsh. 107 15 R. R. 533
Sol. Jo.
V.
;
38/
1 1
;
King King
.....
; . ;
03
10
973 144
i2, 136:
King King
o.
King (1735)
;
3 P.
Wms.
358
V. Victoria Insurance Co. [1896] A. C. 250 ; 65 L. J. P. C. 38 ; 74 L. T, 206 44 W. R. 592^P. C. 365, 1048 Kingdon, Re (1886) 32 Ch. D. 604,; 55 L. J. Ch. 598 54 L. T. 753 ; 34 W. R. 634 1249 kingdon o. Ndttle (1813) I M. &;S. 355 14 R. R. 462 1362,1363 Kingsbury 0. Walter [1901] A. C. 187 70 L. J. Ch. 546 ; 84 L. T. 697 1286 Kingston's (Duchess) Case (1776) 20 Howell, St. Tr. 355 ; 2 Smith, L. C. (iithed.)p. 731 1 178 Kingston 0. Preston (1773) 2 Dougl. 689. 34, 135 Kingston, Miller & Co. v. Kingston & Co. [1912] i Ch. 575 81 L. J. Ch, 417 56 Sol. Jo. 310 28 T. L. R. 246 ; 29 R. P. C. 289 '. 1029 Kinloch v. Craig (1789) 3 T. R. 119:; 4 Bro. P. C. 47 ; i R. R. 664 961 Kinloch o. Sec. of State for India (1882) L. R. 7 App. Ca. 619 51 L. J.Ch 885; 47L. T. 133; 30W. R. 84s 998 Kinnaird v. Trollope (1888) 39 Ch. D. 636 57 L. J. Ch. 905 ; 59 L. T. 433 820 37 W. R. 234 kinnaird i>. Trollope (1889) 42 Ch. D. 610 ; 58 L. J. Ch. 556 ; 60 L. T 892 107,
'
..;....
. .
..
...
1363 819
....
: ;
108
Kinsman
29
v.
50 L. J.
Ch
;
i;
44L-T. 597
77, 847 8 Jur: 1024 13 L. J. Ch. 402 1284 (1844) 3 Ha. 509 Gregory (1876) i Ex. D. 55 45 L. J. Ex. 186; 34 L. T. 24 W. R. 614 407, 410 Kirkcudbright v. Kirkcudbright (1802) 8 Ves. 51 1310,1311 Kirsley . Duck (1712) 2 Vern. 684 614 Kirwan's Trusts, Re (1883) 25 Ch. D. 373 52 L. J. Ch. 952 49 L. T. 292 ' 32 W. R. 581 871, 1242 Kitchen v. Ibbetson (1873) L. R. 17 Eq. 46 43 L. J. Ch. 52 29 L. T. 45 22 W. R. 68 1350 Kitchen 0. Palmer (1877) 46 L. J. Ch. 611 557 Kitton 0. Hewitt [1904] Wj N. 21 840 Klein, Re [1906] W. N. 148 22 T. L. R. 664 227 Kleinwort, Sons & Co. v. Comptoir National [1894] i Q. B. 157 63 L. J, Q.B '. 674; 10 R. 259 416 Knapman, Re (1880) 18 Ch. D. 300 50 L. J. Ch. 629 45 L. T. 102 C. A, 1276,
W.
Kirk Kirk
o.
Eddowes
V.
.....
.
....
. ; ;
1311
Knight's Case (1588) Moo. 199 Goldsb. 15
;
Rep. 54 b
Anders. 173
2 Leon. 124
Knight Knight
V. V.
Boughton (1844)
Caithorpe (1685)
ii CI.
i
&
F. 513
.
8 Jur.
,
923
,
. ,
.
'
Vern. 347
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Knight
Knill
V.
cxlix
PAGE
A. &E. 45 3 Nev. & M. 467 ; 3 L. J. K. B. 135. 527 [1911] 2 Ch. 199 ; 80 L. J. Ch. 708 ; 105 L. T. 178 ; 55 Sol. Jo. 648 ; 27 T. L. R. 525 C. A 991, 999 Kreglinger v. New Patagonia Co. (1913) 29 T. L. R. 464 C. A. reaersed 83 L. J. Ch. 79 109 L. T. 802 [1914] A. C. 25 58 Sol. Jo. 97 ; 30 T. L. R. 114 832, 1013 Krehl v. Burrell (1877) 7 Ch. D. 551 11 Ch. D. 146 48 L. J. Ch. 252 40 L. T. 637 27 W. R. 805 38 L. T. 407 376 Krell V. Henry [1903] 2 K. B. 740 72 L. J, K. B. ^94 89 L. T. 328 C. A. 130,
Gibbs (1834)
1).
Dumergue
Kusel
V.
Watson
48 L.
J.
Ch. 413
27
W.
.
R. 714
.
132 573
o. Tupper (1857) 11 Moo. P. C. 198 .1415 5 W. R. 797 Lacey, Ex parti (1802) 6 Ves. 625 6 R. R. 9 1125 Lacey, Re [1907] i Ch. 330 ;- 76 L. J. Ch. 316 96 L. T. 306 C. A. 1384, 138; Lacey v. Hill, Crowley's Claim (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 182 43 L. J. Ch. 551 ; 30 L. T. 484 ; 22 W. R. 586 237,295 Lacey v. Hill, Leney v. Hill (1875) L. R. 19 Eq. 346 44 L. J. Ch. 215 ; 32 L. T. 4.8 i 23 W. R. 285 1322 ..,'. . Lacoa o. Hooper (1795) 6 T. R. 224 529 Lacons v. Warmoll [1907] 2 K. B. 350 76 L. J. K. B. 914 ; 97 L. T. 379 ; 1421 23 T. L, R. 495 C. A. Ladyman v. Grave (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 763 25 L. T. 52 ; 19 W. R. 856 863 208 Lagerwall v. Wilkinson (1899) 80 L. T. 55 106 Laing . Header (1824) I Car. & P. 257 i L. T. 259 Laird i(. Birkenhead Ry. (1859) Johns. 500 29 L. J. Ch. 218 8 W. R. 58 6 Jur. (N. S.) 140 840 Lairdo. Briggs (1881) i9Ch. D. 22; 45 L. T. 238 856 Lake's Case (1619) Hudson, Star Chamber, 227 : Cal. Stat. Pay. (Dom.) IH, . 502 19, 21 88 L. T. 31 ; 51 W. R. Lake, Re [1903] i K. B. 439 ; 72 L. J. K. B. 213 1123 496 1091 Lake . Gibson (1729) I Eq. Ca. Ab. 291. Lake v. Hatton (1618) Hob. 252 502 i Mod. 58 i Lev. Lakeo. King (1668) i Wms. Saund. 131 b ; i Sid. 414 Hard. 470 240 ; 2 Keb. 361 ; 503,512 Lakeman 0. Mountstephen (1874) L. R. 7 H. L. 17 ; 43 L. J. Q. B. 188 30 L. T. 437 ; 22 W. R. 617 290 Lamare v. Dixon (1873) 43 L. J. Ch. 203 L. R. 6 H. L. 414 ; 22 W. R. 126 49 Lamb v. Evans [1893] i Ch. 218 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 404 2 R. 189 ; 68 L. T. 131 C. A. 210, 223, 234, 427 41 W. R. 405 Lambert, Re (1888) 39 Ch. D. 626 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 927 ; 59 L. T. 429 -' 1315, 1317 Lambert v. Thwaites (1866) L. R. 2 Eq. 151 35 L. J. Ch. 406 ; 14 L. T. 875 159; 14W. R. 532 Lambourn v. McLellan [1903] 2 Ch. 268 72 L. J. Ch. 617 88 L. T. 748 ; 788 51 W. R. 594; 19T. L. R. 529 C. A Lambton 0. Mellish [1894] 3 Ch. 163 63 L. J. Ch. 929 ; 8 R. 807 ; 71 L. T. 337 385 43 W. R. 5 ; 58 J. P. 83s Lamburn v. Cruden (1841) 2 Man. & G. 253 ; 2 Scott (N. R.) 533 ; 10
Labouchere
".
......
; ; ; ; ;
.....
; . . ; ;
L. J.
C.P. 121
213,221
;
Richard [1897] i Q. B. 541 ; 66 L. 45 W. R. 289 ; 6i J. P. 260 liampleigh 0. Braithwaii (1615) Hob. 105
Lamond
o.
J.
Q. B. 315
76 L. T. 141
244, 24s
94
Digitized
by Microsoft
cl
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
; . .
Lamprell v. Billericay Union (1849) 3 Ex. 283 18 L. J. Ex. 282 96 Lancashire Wagon Co. v. Fitzhugh (1861) 6 H. & N. 502 ; 30 L. J. Ex. 231 ; 3 L- T. 703 417, 530 Lancaster v. Eve (1859) 5 C. B. N. S. 717 28 L. J. C. P. 235 5 Jur. (N. S.) 683 ; 7 W. R. 260 713 Lancaster 0. Lowe (161 5) Cro. Jac. 93 730 L. J. Ch. 203 ; 31 Lancefield v. Iggulden (1874) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 136 44 L. T. 813 1265 23 W. R. 223 Land Credit Co., ilc (1872) 21 W^R. 135 1390 Lapd Credit Co. o. Fermoy (Lord) (1870) 39 L. J., Ch. 477 L. R. 5 Ch. 155 323; 22L. T. 394; 18W, R. 393, Land's Patent, Re [1910] 2 Ch; 236 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 594 103 L. T. 102 54 Sol. Jo. 680 10J9 27 R. P. C. 481 Land Tax Commrs. v. Central London Ry. [1913] A. C. 364 82 L. J. Ch. 11 L. G. R. 693 274 108 L. T. 690 77 J. P. 289 57 Sol. Jo. 403 29 T. L. R. 395-^H. L. (E.) 778 Lane, / /Ae Goo^s 0/(1864) 33 L. J. P. 185 1332 Lane, Re (1880) 14 Ch. D. 856 ; 49 L. J. Ch. 768 43 L. T. 87 ; 28 W. R. 1264 ,764 Lane, Re (1889) 23 Q. B. D. 74 58 L. J. Q. B. 373 ; 61 L. T. 54 37 W. R. 80 671 Lane v. Capsey [1891] 3 Ch. 411 61 L. J. Ch. 55 65 L. T. 375 40 W. R. 87 392, 398, 400
; ;
,
....... .......
; ;
.
............
; ; ; ; ; ;
" .
v. o.
Chapman
(1840) 11 A.
i
Cotton (1701)
......
. .
531
11
Mod. Rep. 12
;
Salk.
17
v.
34
Cox [1897]
. .
Q. B. 415
.
.
76 L. T. 135
. . ;
;
.
45
W.
.
R. 261
.
66 L. J. Q. B.
.
. .
.
193
v. v.
.636
382
1
D. 610
v.
............
; ;
3 G.
&
.
252 ; 21 L. J. Q. B. 318 ; 16 Jur. 496 Lane-Fox, Re [19D0] 2 Q. B. 508 ; 69 L. J. Q. B. 722 83 L. T. 176 48 W, R. 650 7 Mans. 295 1060, Langdale (Lady) o. Briggs (1856) 8 De G. M. & G. 391 26 L. J. Ch. 27 12 Jur. (N. S.) 982 4 W. R, 703 Langford, In the Goods of (1867) L, R. i P. & M. 458 37 L. J. P. 20 17 L.T. 415 Langfort 0. Tiler's Admix. (1704) I Salk. 113 Langrick v. Langrick [1920] P. 90; 89 L. J. P. 114.; 123 L. T. 94; 64 Sol. Jo. 531 36 T. L. R. 308 Langridge o. Levy (1837) 2 M. & W. 519 4 M. & W. 337 ; 7 Dowl. 27 Langton v. Carleton (1873) L. R. 9 Ex. 57 43 L. J. Ex. 54 ; 29 L. T. 650 Langton 0. Horton (1842) i Ha. 549 Lanoy v. Athol (Duke) (1742) 2 Atk. 444 Lascelles 0. Oilslow (1877) 2 Q, B. D. 433 46 L. J. Q. B. 333 ; 36 L. T. 459 ; 25 W. R. 496
. ; ; ; . ; ; ;
.
,
170 322
io6i
1262
1332 136 1203 539 212
......
; ;
.
...
...
.
.
....... ......
; ; ; . . . . . .
.
940 836
.'
.721
.
Latham
Atwood
575
44 L. T. 369
. .
29
.
W.
R. 366
'.
.
.432
Laughter's Case (1595) 5 Rep. 21 b . Laugher v. Pointer (1826) 5 B. & C. 547, 558 8 D. & R. 550 4 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 309 . 351,352 Laughton v. Sodor & Man (Bishop of) (1872) L. R. 4 P. C. 495 ; 9 Moore P.C. (N.S.)3iS;42L. J. P.C. n; 28L.T. 377; 21W. R.204. 519
; ; .
.
1
.48
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Launchbury v. Bode [1898] 2 Ch. 120 67 L. J. Ch. 196 78 L. T. 14 62 J-P-248 Laun V. Renad [1892] 3 Ch. 402 61 L. J* Ch. 580 67 L. T. 275 40 W. R.
; ;
;
cli
747
A. 349 Llewellyn [1906] i K. B. 487 75 L. J. K. B. 320 ; 94 L. T. 359 54 W. R. 368 70 J. P. 220C. A. 342, 512 Law V. London Indisputable Life Policy Co. (1855) 3 Eq. R. 338 j i K. & J. 304, 306 223 ; 24 L. J. Ch. 196 ; I Jur. (N. S.) 178 ; 3 W. R. 154 Law V. Redditch Local Board [1892] 1 Q. B. 127 61 L. J. Q. B. 172 ; 66 L. T. 76 56 J. P. 292 C. A 137,138,139 Lawes, Re (1881) 20 Ch. D. 81 ; 45 L. T. 453 30 W. R. 33 . 1283 Lawes v. Bennett (1785) i Cox, 167 1361 Lawford v. Billericay, &c. [1903] 1 K. B. 1 72 L. J. K. B. 554; 88 L. T. II 317; 51 W.R. 630; 67 J. P. 245 . Lawless v. Mansiield (1841) 1 Dr. & War. ^98 ; 4 Ir. Eq. R. 113 49 Lawley v. Lawley (1717) Jac. 71 n. 792 Lawrence . Malo [1904] a! C. 17 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 85 89 L". T. 569 ; 52 W. R. 1038 369 ; 20 T. L. R. 42 Lawrence o. Hedger (1810) 3 Taunt. 13 442 Lawrence v. Hitch (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 521 ; 37 L. J. Q. B. 209 ; 9 B. & S. 694 467; 18 L. T. 483; 16W. R. 813 Lawrence v. Jenkins (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 274 ; 42 L. J. Q. B. 147 ; 28 L. T. 406 ; 21 W. R. 577 .714, 783 Lawtona. Lawton (1743) 3 Atk. 13 788,1356 Layard v. Maud (1867) L. R. 4 Eq. 397 36 L. J. Ch. 669 ; 16 L. T. 618 ; 15 760 W. R. 897 Laybourn 0. Gridley [1892] 2 Ch. 53; 61 L. J. Ch. 352; 40 W. R. '87 474 . Layton . Pearce (1778) I Dougl. 15 Lea o. Charrington (1889) 23 Q. B. D. 45 58 L. J. Q. B. 461 61 L. T. 222 ; 492 37 W. R. 736 ; 16 Cox, C. C. 704 ; 53 J. P. 614 Lea V. Thursby [1904] 2 Ch. 57 73 L. J. Ch. 518 90 L. T. 667 ; 20 T. L. R.
.
679C.
V.
Law
.........
: ;
....
;
.110
553
44, 559
81 L. J. Ch. 683
106 L. T. 1003
56 Sol. Jo.
Leach Leake
(1835) 7 C. & P. 327 v. Loveday (1842) 4 M. & G. 972 624 ; 12 L. J. C. P. 65 ; 7 Jur. 17 Leake o. Robinson (1817) 2 Mer. 363
v.
Thomas
626
;
Scott,
N. R. 908
2 D. (N.
S.)
421
. .
146; 1 Keb. 510; I Lev. 102 Leame . Bray (1803) 3 East, 593 407, 434, 544 Learoyd v. Brook [1891] i Q. B. 431 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 373 ; 64 L. T. 458 ; 39 219 W. R. 480 ; 55 J. P. 265 Learoyd v. Whiteley (1887) L. R. 12 App. Cas. 727 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 390 ; 58 1112,1113 L. T. 93 ; 36 W. R. 721 523; 35 Leather Cloth Co. 0. American Leather Co. (1865) 11 H. L. 12 L. T. 742 ; L. J. Ch. 53 Jr. (N. S.) 513 ; 13 W. R. 873 ; 6 N. R. '28 209 Leathes v. Leathes (1877) 5 Ch. D. 221 ; 46 L. J. Ch. 562 ; 36 L. T. 646 ; 25 574 W. R. 492 658 Lechmere & Lloyd, Re (1881) 18 Ch. D. 524 ; 45 L. T. 551 Leeo. Jones (1864) 17 C. B. N. S. 482 ; 34 L. J. C. P. 131 ; 11 Jur. (N. S.) . . . 292, 293 13 W. R. 318 81 ; 12 L. T. 122 . . . 728 Lee V. Merest (1870) 39 L. J. Ecc. 53 ; 22 L. T. 420 . . . 1275 Lee V. Pain (1845) 4 Ha. 201 ; 14 L. J. Ch. 346 ; 9 Jur. 247
Leakinso.
Clissel (1663)
Sid.
-537
877
"
..
...
Digitized
by Microsoft
clli
TABLE OF CASES
0.
1079 .* Vincent (1584) Cro. EHz. 26 V. Walker (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 121 41 L. J. C. P. 91 ; 26 L. T. 70 Leech's (Sir Simon) Case (1692) Carth. 250 Leeds (Duke of) v. Amherst (1846) 2 Ph. 117 10 Jur. 956 Leeds v. Cromptoji (1586) cited 4 Rep. 120 a; Noy, 32; Cro. Eliz. 8i6; 4 Leon. 58, Godb. 93 Leeds (Duke of) o. Stratford (Earl of) (1798) 4 Ves. 180 Leeming, i?e [1912] i Ch. 828 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 453 106 L. T. 793 Lees B. Nuttall (1829) i Russ. & M. 53 ; Tam. 282 Lees v. Whitcomb (1828) 5 Bing. 34 2 M. & P. 86 3 Car. & P. 289 ; 6 L. J. (0. S.) C. P. 213 30 R. R. 539 Le Fanuo. Malcolmson (1848) I H. L. C. 637 Legg 0. Strudwick (1709) 2 Salk. 414 Legh, Re [1902] 2 Ch. 274 71 L. J. Ch. 668 66 J. P. 600 86 L. T. 884
o.
. ; ; .
.
............
;
PAGE
618 873 230
23 L. J. Ex. 198
W.
R. 377
2 C. L. R.
812
791
....
.
...
; ;
233
215 508 619
1
130
of (1586) 2 Leon. 190 Leicester Forest Case (1607) Cro. Jac. 155 Leigh, Tie (1888) 40 Ch. :D. 290 ; 58 L. jf. Ch. 306 241 C.
.
Town
.
.
.
.
. .
694 684
A 899 Dickeson (1884) 15 Q. B. D. 60 54 L. J. Q. B. 18 52 L. T. 790 ; 33 W. R. 538^c. A 763 Leigh z). 'Gladstone (1909) 26 T. L. R. 139 437 Leigh V. Shepherd (1821) 2 Brod. & B. 465 5 Moore, 297 5 23 R. R. 516 . 1084 Leigh V. Taylor [1902] A. C. 157 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 272 86 L. T. 239 ; 50 W. R. 623; i8'T. L. R. 293 '. 788,1356 Leiston Gas Co. o. Leiston Council [1916] 2 K. B. 428 ; 85 L. J. K. B. 1759 ; 115L. T. 172; 80 J. P. 385; 14L. G..R. 922; 60 S.J. 554; 32T. L. R. 588 C. A 132 Leith II. Pope (1780) 2 W. Bl. 1327 493 Le Lievre . Gould [.1893J i Q. B. 491 62 L. J. Q. B. 353 4 R. 274 ; 68 L. T. 626; 41. W. R. 468; 57 J. P. 484 C. A 329 Lemage v. Goodban (18S5) L. R. i P. cfe M. 57 ; 35 L. J. P. 28 ; 13 L. T. 508 12 Jur. (N. S.) 32 1247 Le Maitre v. Davis (1881) 19 Ch. D. 281 ; 5: L. J. Ch. 173 46 L. T. 407 ; 30 W. R. 360 ; 46 J. P. 324 355 Le Mesurier o, Le Mesurier [1895] A. C. 517 64 L. J. P. C. 97 ; 72 L. T. 873 ; .' ii-R. 527 1204 Lemmon v. Webb [1894] 3 Ch. i ; 63 L. J. Ch. 570 ; 70 L. T. 712 ; 58 J. P. 716 7 R. 275 affirmed [1895] A. C. i 64 L. J. Ch. 205 71 L. T. 647 59J.P..564; II R. 116 ., .. 4,381,385,399,714,780 Lempriere v. Lange (1879) '^ Ch. D. 675 ; 41 L. T. 378 ; 27 W. R. 879 . 348 ii.JVIartin (1777) 2 W. Bl. 1148 Lempriere 597,598 Lempriere 0. Pasley (1788) 2 T. R. 485 965 Le Neyfi 0. Le Neve (1747) I Ambl. 436 757 Leng, Re [1895] i Ch.652 64 L. J. Ch. 468 72 L. T. 407 ; 43 W. R. 406 12.R. 2ca C. A. 1387, 1388, 1389 Leonard v. Leonard [1902] P. 243 ; 71 L. J. P. 1 17 87 L. T. 145 18 T. L. R, 1248 747 , Lepard . Vernon (1813) 2 V. & B. 51 13 R. R. 13 1408 Lepine, iJe,[i892] i Ch. 210 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 153 66 L. T. 360 C. A. 1412 Lepla V. Rogers [1893] i Q. B. 31 68 L. T. 584; 57 J. P. 55 5 R. 57 122 Leroux v. Brown (1852) 12 C. B. 801 22 L. J. C. P. i 16 Jur. 1021 W. R. 22
Leigh
V.
;
60 L. T. 404
;
37
W. R.
......
;
.
..... .....
; ; ; . ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
LesUe
Lesbe
v.
cliii
PAGE
Cave (1888)
3 T. L.
R. 584
T. L. R. 5
56 L. T. 332
35
W. R.
406
1201
.515
v. Leslie [1911] P. 203 ; 80 L. J. P. 139 ; sub nam. L. V. L. (No. 2) 104 L. T. 462 ; 27 T. L. R. 316 ; S5 Sol. Jo. 386 Leslie, Ltd. v. ShieU [1914] 3 K. B. 607 ; 83 L. J. K. B. 1 145 ; 1 1 1 L. T. 106 58 Sol. Jo. 453 ; 30 T. L. R. 460 C.
Leslie V.
(1851) 9 Ha. 268 ; 20 L. J. Ch. 561 ; 15 Jur. 717 . . Lester v. Garland (1808) 15 Ves. 248 ; 10 R. R. 68 Lethbridge v. Phillips (18 19) 2 Stark. 544 Leuckhart v. Cooper (1836) 3 Bing. N. C. 99 ; 6 L. J. C. P. 131 ; 3 Scott, 521 Lever v. Goodwin (1887) 36 Ch. D. i ; 57 L. T. 583 ; 36 W. R. 177 C. A.' '. Leverett o. Townsend (^1590) Cro. Eliz. 198 Levy V. Abercorris Slate Co. (1887) 37 Ch. D. 260 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 202 ; 58 L. T. . 218; 36W. R. 411 . . Levy V. Stogdon [1898] i Ch. 478 ; 67 L. J. Ch. 313 ; 78 L. T. 185 ; affirmed ". . . [1899] I Ch. 5 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 19 ; 79 L. T. 364 C. A. Levy V. Walker (1879) 10 Ch. D. 436 ; 48 L. J. Ch. 273 ; 39 L. T. 654 ; 27
Tompson
348 38
71
206
963 378
681
1009
136
R. 370 C. A. 1030 Yates (1838) 3 N. & P. 249 i W. W. & H. 219 ; 8 A. & E. 129 ; 7 L. J. Q. B. 138 . . 95 Lewal, Re [1918] 2 Ch. 391 81 L. J. Ch. 588 ; 119 L. T. 520 ; 62 Sol. Jo. 702 ; 34 T. L. R. 538 1255 Leward . Baseley (1694) I Ld. Raym. 62 Salk. 407 434 Lewin v. Lewin (1752) 2 Ves. Sen. 415 1266 Lewis, i?e [1910] W. N. 217 ; 103 L. T. 495 .1125 55 Sol. Jo. 29 Lewis o. Alcock (1838) 3 M. & W. 188 6 Dowl. 389 530 Lewis V. Baker [1905] i Ch. 46 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 39 ; 21 T. L. R. 7 54 W. R. 146 611 Lewis V. Baker (No. a) [1906] 2 K. B. 599 75 L. J. K. B. 848 ; 95 L. T. 10 22 T. L. R. 680 Lewis V. BranthWaite (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 437 9 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. 263 594, 781 Lewis V. Clay (1898) 67 L. J. Q. B. 224 77 L. T. 653 46 W. R. 319. 37 Lewis V. Lane (1834) 2 Myl. & K. 449 586 Lewis V. Levy {li^S) El. Bl. & El. 537 27 L. J. Q. B. 282 ; 4 Jur. (N. S.) 970 ; 6 W. R. 629 516 Lewis V. Lewi3'(i87i) L. R. 13 Eq. 218 41 L. J. Ch. 195 ; 25 L. T. 555 20 W. R. 141 1395 Lewis V. Ponsford (1838) 8 C. & P. 687 471 Lewknor's Case (1586) 4 Leon. 162 789 Ley, / /Ae Gooiis 0/' (1840) 2 Curt. 375 1244 Ley c. Ley (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 175 ; 37 L. J. Ch. 328 18 L. T. 126 ; 16 W. R. 59 995 LejTman v. Latimer (1877) 3 ^^- ^- 35^ 47 L- J- Ex. 470 37 L. T. 819 26 W. R. 305 14 Cox, C. C. 51 524 Lickbarrow v. Mason (1787) 2 T. R. 63 943 . Lidderdale v. Montrose (Duke) (1791) 4 T. R. 248 2 R. R. 375 999 1028 Liebig's Extract of Meat Co. o. Hanbury (1867) 17 L. T. 298 Liebmann, Ex pane [1916] i K. B. 268 ; 85 L. J. K. B. 210 ; 113 L. T. 971 31A 80 J. P. 49 32 T. L. R. 3 Lightly o. Clouston (1808) 1 Taunt. 112 476 Liles V. Terry [1895] 2 Q. B. 679 ; 65 L. J. Q. B. 34 73 L. T. 428 ; 44 W. R. 36 116 560 Lilford's Case (1614) II Rep. 49 a 16 L. T. Lilford (Lord) o. A.-G. (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 63 ; 36 L. J. Ex. 116 184; 15W. R. 595 555
W.
o.
Levy
>
....
...
. ; .
.
.618
.
.......
; ; ; ;
....... ......
; ; ; . .
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
cliv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Doubleday (1881)
708 Elwin (1848)
11
Lilley o.
51 L. J. Q. B.
310
7 Q. B. D. 510
;
44 L. T. 814
.
46
J. P.
122,
204
208,
Lilley v.
Q. B. 742
17 L. J. Q. B. 132
12 Jur. 623
211, 213
Lilley
Roney (1892) 61 L. J. Q. B. 727 Lijnond, Re [1915] 2 Ch. 240 84 L. J. Ch. 833 59 Sol. Jo. 613 Limpusc Lt)ndon General Omnibus Co. (1862) i H. & C. 526 32
v.
;
;
342 1259
L. J. Ex.
. .
II W. R. 149 34 9 Jur. (N. S.) 333 7 L. T. 641 Lind, Re [1915] 2 Ch. 345 941 84 L. J. Ch. 884 59 Sol. Jo. 651 C. A. Lingwood . Gyde (1866) L. R. 2 C. P. 72 ; 36 L. J. C. P. 10 ; 16 L. T. 229 ; 15W. R. 311 584 Linoleum Co. n. Nairn (1878) 7 Ch. D. 835 47 L. J. Ch. 430 38 L. T. 44 1029 20 W. R. 463 . Linotype Co. w. British Empire Co. (1899) 81 L. T. 331 Linsley, Re [1904] 2 Ch. 785 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 841 1139 53 W. R. 172 Lintott, Ex parte {i%6i) 36 L. J. Ch. 510 ; L. R. 4 Eq. 184 ; 16 L. T. 228 ; II15 W. R. 617 Liquidation Estates Co. o. Willoughby [1898] A. C. 321 ; 67 L. J. Ch. 251 830 14 T. L. R. 295 78 L. T. 329 46 W. R. 589 Lister v. Lanes. & Yorks. Ry. [1903] i K. B. 878 ; 72 L. J. K. B. 385 ; 88 L. T. 561 ; 52 W. R. 12 250 Lister v. Ferryman (1870) L. R. 4 H. L. 521 ; 39 L. J. Ex. 177 ; 23 L. T. 269 : 19 W. R. 9 442, 49I1 493 Lister v. Stubbs (1890) 45 Ch. D. i 59 L. J. Ch. 570 ; 63 L. T. 75 ; 38 W. R. 548 23-3 Littleton o. Hibbins (1600) Cro. Eliz. 793 i375i '377 Liver Alkali Co. o. Johnson (1874) L. R. 9 Ex. 338 ; 43 L. J. Ex. 216 31 L. T. 95 249, 261 Liverpool & Adelphi Loan Co. v. Fairhurst (1854) 9 Exch. 422 ; 23 L. J. Ex. 18 Jur. 191 2 W. R. 233 58 163 2 Liv;erpool Household Stores, iJc (1890) 59 L. J. Ch. 616; 62 L. T. 873 Meg. 217 229 Liversidge 0. Broadbent (1859) 4 H. & N. 603 ; 28 L. J. Ex. 332 7 W. R. 6'5 143 Llandudno Urban Council v. Woods [i'899l 2 Ch. 705 68 L. J. Ch. 623 81 ,L. T. 170 48 W. R. 43 63 J. P. 775 377 Llewellin, Re [1891] 3 Ch. 145 ; 60 L. J. Ch. 732 65 L. T. 249 ; 39 W. R. 713 962 Llewellyn, Re [1911] i Ch. 451 80 L. J. Ch. 259 104 L. T. 279 ; 55 Sol. Jo.
; ; ; . . ; ; ; ;
.
.35'
.508
.
...........
; ; ; ; ; " ; ; ; ; ; ;
Williams (1610) Cro. Jac. 258 614 72 L. J. Ch. 78 87 L. T. 541 : 51 W. R. 177 [1903] i Ch. 385 19 T. L. R. loi C. A 996 Lloyd o. Carew (1697) Pre. Ch. 72 . 1074 Lloyd V. Dimmack (1877) 47 L. J. Ch. 398 ; 7 Ch. D. 398 38 L. T. 173 ; 26 W. R. 458 123 Lloyds. Jones (1848) 6 C. B. 81 12 Jur. 657 17 L. J. C. P. 206 745 Lloyd B. Nowell [1895] 2 Ch. 744 ; 64 L. J. Ch. 744 13 R. 712 73 L. T. I54;44W. R. 43 91 Lloyd 0. Spillet (1740) 2 Atk. 148 813,1103 Lloyds. Tench (1750) 2 Ves. Sen. 212 1308,1309 Lloyd's V. Harper (1880) 16 Ch. D. 290 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 140 43 L. T. 481 ; 29 W. R. 452 292, 293, 300 Lloyds' Bank v. Colston [1912] W. N. 26 ; 106 L. T. 420 827 Lloyds' Banking Co. v. Jones (1885) 29 Ch. D. 221 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 931 ; 52 L. T. 469 33 W. R. 781 761
v.
254 Llewelyn
Lloyd,
Re
......
. . . . . ; ;
.
884
....
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Lloyds'
Lloyds'
civ
PAGE
Bank
v.
Pearson [1901]
Ch. 865
70 L. J. Ch. 422
;
84 L. T. 314
;
761,
"53
Bank v. Swiss Bankverein (1912) 107 L. T. 309 28 T. L. R. 501 56 Sol. Jo. 688 17 Com. Cas. 280 (191 3) 108 L. T. 143 57 Sol. Jo. 29 T. L. R. 219; 18 Com. Cas. 79 C. A. 243 ; W. N. 52 933, 960 Lloyd Edwards, i?e (1891) 61 L. J. Ch. 22; 65 L.T. 453 117 Lloyd- Jones v. Clarke-Lloyd [1919] i Ch. 424 88 L. J. Ch. 278 120 L. T. 578; 63 Sol. Jo. 317; 35 T. L. R. 273 C. A 887 Llynvi Co. v. Brogden (1870) L. R. 11 Eq. 188 40 L. J. Ch. 46 23 L. T. 518; 19 W. R. 196 378 Loane v. Casey (1775) 2 Wm. Bl. 965 1382 Lock V. Furze (1866) 19 C. B. N. S. 96 11 Jur. (N. S.) 726 affirmed, i H. & R. 379 35 L. J. C. P. 141 L. R. I C. P. 441 15 L. T. 161 14 W. R. 403 121 Lockwood . Abdy (1845) 14 Sim. 437 9 Jur. 267 231 Lockwood V. Cooper [1903] 2 K. B. 428 72 L. J. K. B. 690 ; 89 L. T. 306 52 W. R. 48 ; 67 J. P. 307 309,311 Lockwood V. Levick (i860) 8 C. B. N. S. 603 ; 29 L. J. C. P. 340 7 Jur. (N. S.) 102 2 L. T. 357 8 W. R. 583 237 Lockwood V. Wood (1841) 6 Q. B. 31 13 L. _J. Q. B. 365 ; 8 Jur. 543 704 Loddington v. Kime (1694) i Salk. 224 656 Lodge's Patent, Re [1911J 2 Ch. 46; 80 L. J. Ch. 517; 104 L. T. 716; 1015 27 T. L. R. 419 28 R. P. C. 362 Lodge V. National Union Invest. Co. [1907] i Ch. 300 76 L. J. Ch. 187 ; 96 L. T. 301 23 T. L. R. 187 930 Lodie . Arnold (1697) 2 Salk. 458 15 Jur. 117 399 Logan V. Bank of Scotland [1904] 2 K. B. 495 73 L. J. K. B. 794 ; 91 20 T. L. R. 640--C. A L. T. 252 8 53 W. R. 39 Logann. Wienholt (1833) I CI. & F. 611 7Bligh(N. S.) I London's (Bishop of) Case (1522) Y. B. 14 Hen. VIII, pi. i 770 London (Mayor and Corporation of). Re [1910] 2 Ch. 314 79 L. J. Ch. 622 20 54 Sol. Jo. 562 616 103 L. "T. London Assurance v. Mansel (1879) 11 Ch. D. 363 48 L. J. Ch. 331 ; 41 L. T. 225 27 W. R. 444 39, 305 L. B. & S. C. Ry. V. Truman (1885) L. R. 11 App. Ca. 45 55 L.J. Ch. 354; 54 L. T. 250 34 W. R. 657 50 J. P. 388-H. L. (E.) 344, 393 London Chartered Bank of Australia v. White (1879) 4 App. Cas. 413 48 L. J. C. P. 75 205
; ; ;
....
. ; ; ; ;
.......
; ; ; ;
.....
.
.......
; ; ; .
. .
.....
. . ;
.140
;
........
; ;
. .
42 49 L. J. Ch. 297 L. T. 580 44 J. P. 345 28 W. R. 610 London County Council . A.-G. [1902] A. C. 165 71 L. J. Ch. 268 86 L. T. 161 ; 50 W. R. 497 ; 66 J. P. 340 London & Globe Finance Corporation, Re [1902] 2 Ch. 416 71 L. J. Ch. 18 T. L. R. 679 87 L. T. 49 893 London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Fearnley (1880) 5 App. Cas. 911 ; 43 L. T. 390 28 W. R. 893 45 J. P. 4 London & Midland Bank v. Mitchell [1899] 2 Ch. 161 : 68 L. J. Ch. 568 81 15 T. L. R. 420 L. T. 263 ; 47 W. R. 602 London & Northern Bank, In re [1900] i Ch. 220 69 L. J. Ch. 24 8i L. T. 512; 7 Manson, 60 L. & N. W. Ry. Co. V. West (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 553 ; 36 L. J. C. P.
-o.
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; : ;
London (City of) v. Goree (1677) 3 Keb. 677 Riggs (1880) 13 Ch. D. 798 London Corporation
324
708
10
962
185
.........
; ; ;
947
91
245
55
41 Ch. D. 547
;
58 L. J. Ch. 752
60 606
W.
R. 61
Digitized
by Microsoft
clvi
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
S.
W. Ry. o. Gomm (1882) 20 Ch. D. 449 30 W. R. 620 Long, Re [1901] W. N. 166', 36 L. J. 405
L.
&
562
;
51 L. J. Ch.
530; 46L. T.
804, 1075
26,
Long . Blackall (1797) 7 T. R. 100 4 Long c. Grayi(i9i3) 58 Sol. Jo. 46^ -C. A. Long . Hebb (1652) Style, 341 Long V. Keightley (1877) li I. R, C. L. 221 Long . Long (1890) 15 P. D. 218 60 L. J. P. 27 Long V. Millar(i879) 48 L. J. C. P. 596 4 C. P. D. 450 27 W. Long v.. Symes (1832) 3 Hagg. Ecd. 771 Longchamp o. Fish (1807) 2 Bos. & P. N. R. 415 Longmeid 0. Hblliday (1851) 6 Exch. 761 20 L. J. Ex. 430
.....
.
.
'
....
;
720
C. A,
102
Lonsdale D. Nelson (1823) 2 B. & C. 311 3 D. & R. 556 ; 2 L. J. (0. S.) K. B, 28 ; 26 R. R. 363 Lonsdale v. Rigg (1857) i H. & N. 923 ; 26 L. J. Ex. 196 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.') 390 . 5 W. R. 355 Looker v. Looker [1918] P. 132 87 L. J. P. 72 ; 118 L. T. 654 62 Sol. Jo 405; 34T. L. R. 270 Loom, Re [1910] 2 Ch. 230 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 704 ; 102 L. T. 907 ; 54 Sol. Jo. 583 Lord V. Lord (1867) L. R. 2 Ch. ApfS 782 ; 36 L. J. Ch. 533 17 L. T. 105 15W. R. 1118 Lord V. Price (1874) L. R. 9 Ex. ^4 ; 43 L. J. Ex. 49 22 30 L. T. 271 W. R. 318 Lotan 0. Cross (i!8io) 2 Camp. 464. Lougher v. Williams (1673) 2 Lev. 92 Louis o. Louis (1866) L. R. i P. & M. 230 35 L. J. P. & M. 92 14 L. T. 770 14 W. R. 102(3 Louis V. Smellie (1895) 73 L. T. 226 C. A. Loveday, In the Goods of [i goo] P. 154 69 L. J. P. 48 83 L. T. 692 Lovell V. Beaucharap [1894] A. C. 607 63 L. J. Q. B. 802 71 L. T. 587 43 W. R. 129; I Manson, 467 Lovell . Lovell (1743) 3 Atk. II Lovell o. Martin (1813) 4 Taunt. 801 14 R. R. 668 Lovelock V. Franklyn (1846) 8 Q. B. 371 ; 15 L. J. Q. B. 146 ; 10 Jur. 246
;
.
399 932
1
179
752
1
271
.....
. .
.
'
'
414 409
1363
1201
'
210
1356
....... ...
;
. . .
267 59 415
120,
146 Loveridge, Re, Drayton 11. Loveridge [1902] 2 Ch. 859 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 865 87 L. T. 294 ; 51 W. R. 232 1354 Loveridge, Re, Pearce v. Marsh [1904] i Ch. 518 ; 73 L. J, 503 ; 52 W. R. 138 8, 1354 Lowo. Bouvttie [1891] 3 Ch. 82 ; 60 L. J. Ch. 594 ; 65 L.
50C. A
V.
Low
Burron (1734)
3 P.
Wms. 262
'
1154 580
T. 195
;
Lowe o. Adams
[1901] 2 Ch. 598 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 783 85 L. 37 ; 17 T. L. R. 763 Lowe V. Chester (Bishop) (1883) 10 Q. B. D. 407 48 L. T. Lowe 0. Darhng [1906] 2 K. B. 772 75 L. J. K. B. 1019 T. L. R. 779 Lowe V. Dixon (1885) 16 Q'. B. D. 455 34 W. R. 441 Lowe V. Fox (1885) 15 Q. B. D. 667 ; 54 L. J. Q. B. 561 W. R. 144; 50 J. P.' 244 Lowndes, Re (1887) 18 Q. B. D. 677 ^6 L. J. Q. B. 425 ; W. R. 549'; 4Morrell, 139 Lowndes i>. CoUens (1810) 17 Ves. 27 . Lowndes v. Stont (17^75 4 Ves. 649 ; 4 R. R. 316 . Lows 11. Telford (1876; Li R. i App. Ca. 414
; ; ; . . .
. .
50
J-
W.
R.
79
47
95 L. T. 243
22
533
156,
297
53 L. T. 886
34
77,
....
;
.
844
56 L. T. 575
35
. .
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Lowther e. Carlton (1740) Barn, Ch. 359 Lowthers. Lowther (i8o6) 13 Ves. 95 Lubbock o. Tribe (1838) 3 M. & W. 607;
158
clvii
PAGE
757 930
H.
&
H. 160
7 L. J.
Ex
Luby
3"
Ir. C.
v.
L. R. 618.
L. J. Ch.
.
Cobden (1890) 60
40
470 ; 63 L. T. 538 ; 39 W. R. 90 96, 127 Lucas V. De la Cour (1813) i M. & S. 249 ; 14 R. R. 426 64 Lucas V. Dixon (1889) 58 L. J. Q. B. 161 22 Q. B. D. 357 ; 37 W. R, 37 102 Lucas V. Dorridh (1817) 7 Taunt. 278 ; i Moore, 29 ; 18 R. R. 480 922 Lucas V. Janies (1849) 7 Hare, 410 ; 18 L. J. Ch. 329 ; 13 Jur. 912 90 Lucena v. Lucena (1842) 5 Beav. 249 870 Lucy V. Levington (1671) 2 Lev. 26 1363 Ludgater v. Love (1881) 44 L. T. 694 45 J. P. 600 C. A. 64, 543 Ludwell V. Newman (1795) 6 T. R. 458 3 R. R. 231 6l2 Luke V. South Kensington Hotel Co. (1879) 11 Ch. D. 121 ; 48 L. J. Ch 361; 40 L. T. 638; 27W. R. 514C. A. 157 Lumley v. Gye (1853) 2 E. & B. 224 ; 22 L. J. Q. B. 463 475, 479 Lumley v. Wagner (1852) i De G. M. & G. 604 ; 21 L. J. Ch. 898 16 Jur.
;
45 Ch.
34
..... ....
. . .
871
28 T. L. R. 45 19 Mans. 26 C. A i Ir. Ch. R. 273 Lusher v. Hassard (1904) 20 T. L. R. 563 C. A. . Lutterel . Weston (161 1) Cro. Jac. 308 Luttrel's Case (1601) 4 Rep. 86 a 722, Lycett V. Stafford & Uttoxeter Ry. (1872) L. R. 13 Eq. 261 ; 41 L. J. Ch, 474 25 L. T. 870 Lyddon v. Moss (1859) 4 De G. cfe J. 104 ; 5 Jur. (N. S.) 637 7 W. R. 433 Lyde v. Barnard (1836) i M. & W. 115 i Gale, 388 ; i Tyr. & Gr. 250 ; 5 L. J. Ex. 117 Lyell V. Hothfield (Lord), [1914] 3 K. B. 91 1 ; 84 L. J. K. B. 251 30 T. L. R. 630 Lyles V. Southend-on-Sea [1905] 2, K. B. i 74 L. J. K. B. 484 ; 69 J. P. 3 L. G. R. 691 C. A. 193 ; 92 L. T. 586 ; 21 T. L. R. 389 Lynch o. DalzeU (1729) 4 Bro. P. C. 431 Lynch v. Knight (1861) 9 H. L. C. 577 5 L. T. 291 464, 470, 473, Lynch v. Nurdin (1841) i Q. B. 29 ; 4 P. & D. 672; lo L. J. Q. B. 73 ;
Sol. Jo.
o.
Lundyc. Lundy (i895)24Can. S. C. 650 Lunn.c. Thornton (1845) 15 M. & W. 379 Lupton, Re [1912] 1 K. B. 107 8i L. J. K. B. 177
;
128
1277
940
999 672
590 849 839 232
541
,
205
105 L. T. 726
56
Lurting
Conn
(1850)
......
. . .
. . . .
-75
853
345 305 505
5 Jur- 797 Lynch-Blosse, iJe [1899] W. N. 27 (8) Lyne, 'A;pae (1822) 3 Starkie, 132 Lynes, Re [1893] 2 Q. B. 113 ; 62 L. J. Q. B. 372
.......
;
327, 334
1122 441
68 L. T. 739
41
W.
R.
488
Fishmonger's Co. (1876) L. R. 1 App. Ca. 662 ; 46 L. J. Ch. 68 ; 35 L. T. 569 ; 25 W. R. 16S-H. L. (E.) 328, 392, Lyon o. Home (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 655 ; 37 L. J. Ch. 674 81 L. T. 451 ; 16 W. R. 824 Lyons v. De Pass (1840) 1 1 A. & E. 326 3 P. & D. 177 9 C. & P. 68 ; 9 L. J. Q. B. SI 4 Jur. 505 Lyons v. Wilkins [1899] i Ch. 267 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 146 79 L. T. 709 ; 47 W. R. 291 ; 63 J. P. 339C. A Lvsaght V. Edwards (1876) 2 Ch. D. 499 45 L. J. Ch. 554 34 L. T. ' 787 ; 24 W. R. 778 189,
o.
. .
. .
29
773
Lyon
34 947
402
19J
Digitized
by Microsoft
clviii
TABLE OF CASES
M. 414
;
M.
V.
41 L. J. P.
&
M. 37
26 L. T. 321
.
.
177
Macartney
0.
54 L. J. P. 68 ; 33 W. R. 657 102 92 L. T. 371 74 L. J. K. B. 452 107 Londonderry & Co. [1904] A. C. 301 73 L. J. P. C. 73
; ; ; ; ; ;
Macbeth
R. 610 v. N. & S. Wales Bank [1906] 2 K. B. 718 75 L. J. K. B. 1026 [1908] A. C. 137; I K. B. 13 McGallum, Re [1901] i Ch. 143 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 206 83 L. T. 717 ; 49 W. R. 129; 17T. L. R. 112 MacCarthy 0. Jacob & Richardson, Ruegg (7th ed.) 133 MacCarthy o. Young (1861) 6 H. & N. 329 ; 30 L. J. Ex. 227 3 L. T. 785 9 W. R. 439 McCartney v. Londonderry Ry. [1904] A. C. 301 73 L. J. P. C. 73 91 L. T. 105; 52W. R.'385
; ; .
. .
........ ...........
; ;
1176,1177
21
950
327
1339
91
64 L.
J.
P. 126
73 L. T. 193
416 76 364
198
...
710
1225
McClellan, a;pae (1831) I Dow. 81 Macclesfield (Mayor) v. Chapman (1843) 12 M. & W. 18 ; 13 L. J. Ex. 32 ; 7 Jur. 1041 Macclesfield (Mayor) o. Pedley (1833) 4 B. & Ad. 397 ; i Nev. & M. 708 McCloughan v. Clayton (1816) Holt, N. P. 478 MeClure's Settlement, Re (1906)76 L. J. Ch. 52 ; 95 L. T. 704 ; 23 T. L. R.
...........
.
42
McCreight II. McCmght (1849) 13 Ir. Eq. 314 1234 66 L. J. Ch. 630 Macdonald, Re [1897] 2 Ch. 181 76 L. T. 713 ; 45 W. R. 628 76, 1384 Macdonald v. Irvine (1878) 8 Ch. D. loi ; 47 L. J. Ch. 494 38 L. T. 155 26W. R. 381 1 121 Macdougall v. Knight (1889) L. R. 14 App. Cas. 194 58 L. J. Q. B. 537 ; 60 L. T. 762 38 W. R. 44 516,517 S3 J. P. 691 MacDowallc. G. W. Ry. [1903] 2 K. B. 331 72 L. J. K. B. 652 88 L. T. 825 19 T. L. R. 552 C. A. 327,334 McEacharn, i? (1911) W. N. 23 103 L. T. 900 1119 55 Sol. Jo. 204 McEntire v. Crowley Bros. [1895] A. C, 457 64 L. J. P. C. 129 72 L. T. 731; 2 Mans. 334; II R. 207 950 McEwan v. Smith (1849) ^ H. L. C. 309 ; 13 Jur. 265 922 McGachen o. Dew (1851) 15 Beav. 84 1115 McGrath, Re [1893] i Ch. 143 62 L. J. Ch. 208 67 L. T. 636 41 W. R. 1219,1220,1221,1226 97; 2 R. 137^ ^C. A McGregor v. Thwaites (1824) 3 B. & C. 24 4 Dbwl. & R. 695 508 McGruther v. Pitcher [1904] 2 Ch. 306 73 L. J. Ch. 653 91 L. T. 678 ; 20 T. L. R. 652; 53W. R. 138 C. A 927,1018 Machado v. Pontes [1897] 2 Q. B, 231 66 L. J. Q. B. 542 76 L. T. 588 ; 45 W. R. 565C. A. 339 Machil 0. Clark (1702) 2 Salk. 619 570 Machu, i?e (1882) 21 Ch. D. 838 47 L. T. 577 30 W. R .837 43, 44, 558, 559 Mcllquham v. Taylor [1895] i Ch. 53 63 L. J. Ch. 758 ; affirmed 71 L. T. 8 R. 750 n. C. A 1002 679 Macintosh v. Dun [1908] A. C. 391 77 L. J. P. C. 113 24 99 L. T. 64 R,7o5 T. L. 518
; ;
.
........... .....
(1805) 7 East, ^ ; 3 Smith, 3 ; 8 R. R. 534 (1869) L. R. 4 H. L. 82 ; Ir. R. i Eq. 313 ; 17
.
416
1
W.
R.
100
.... .......
'
'.
.......
; ; . ; ;
Pigitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Mclvers. Richardson (1813) I M. & S. 557 Mackay, iJe[j9ii] I Ch. 300; 80 L. J. Ch. 237; 103 L. T. 755 Mackay o. Dick (1881) 6 App. Ca. 251
cUx
PAGE
.
go 1146,1147 48
;
Mackay o. Douglas
41 L. J. Ch. 539
26 L. T. 721
(1870) L. R. 6 Ex. 36
40 L.
Mackensie v. Robinson (1747) 3 Atk. 559 755 Mackenzie, In the Estate /"[igog] P. 305 26 T. L. R. 39 1330 Mackenzie, Re [191 1] i Ch. 578 ; 80 L. J. Ch. 443 105 L. T. 154 .27 T. L. R-337; 55S0I. Jo. 406 3, 1184 Mackenzie 11. Childers (1889) 43 Ch. D. 265 59 L. J. Ch. 188 ; 69 L. T. 98 .805, 806 McKenzie o. Hardinge (1906) 23 T. L. R. 15 468 McKerrell, Re [1912] 2 Ch. 648 82 L. J. Ch. 22 ; 107 L. T. 404 1092, 1093 Mackinley o. Sison (1837) 8 Sim. 561 ; i Jur. 558 867 Mackinnon v. Peach (1838) 2 Keen, 555 7 L. J. Ch. 211 1288
; .
. ;
......
J.
Ex. 30
24 L. T. 559
1060 251
Macklin, .Epae (1755) 2 Ves. Sen. 675 Mackreth . Symmons (1805) 15 Ves. 329 MacLaughlin v. Pryor (1842) 4 M. & G. 48 4 Scott, N. R. 555 ; Car. & Man. L.J. C. P. 169 354; Macleay, Re (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 186 44 L. J. Ch. 441 : 32 L. T. 682 23
1235
840
354
McLeod
M'Leod
W.R.718 V. Drummond
R. R. 41
V.
.
...
; .
45,558
;
11
.
1406
152
Power
67 L. J. Ch. 551
;
79 L. T. 67;
;
47 48
;
W.
McLeod
R. 74
V. St.
Aubyn
[1899] A. C. 549
68 L. J. P. C. 137
;
81 L. T. 158
W. R. 173 506 Maclure, Ex parte (1870) L. R. 5 Ch. 737 23 L. T. 685 39 L. J. Ch. 685 ." i8 W. R. 1122 McMahon v. Lennard (1858) 6 H. L. C. 970 742 McManus v. Bark (1870) 39 L. J. Ex. 65 L. R. 5 Ex. 65 21 L. T. 676 151 McManus v. Cooke (1887) 35 Ch. D. 681 56 L. J. Ch. 662 56 L. T. 900 51 J. P. 708 35 W. R. 754 99, 671 MacManus v. Crickett (1800) i East, 106 5 R. R. 518 353 M'Manus v. Lanes. & Yorks. Ry. (1859) 4 H. & N. 327 28 L. J. Ex. 353 ;
. .
. .
......
. .
.
.222
. ;
....
-
Sjur. (N. S.)65i; 7W. R..S47 MacMillan v. Dent [1907] i Ch. 120 76 L. T. L. R. 45 C. A
;
256
J. Ch. 136
;
95 L. T. 730
23
;
427 Goods of {1S67) L. R. i P. & M. 540 37 L. J. P. 14 17 16 W. R. 283 L. T. 393 21, 1244, 1256 McMurray . Spicer (1868) 37 L. J. Ch. 505; L. R. 5 Eq. 527; 16 loi W. R. 332 McMyn, Re (1886) 33 Ch. D. 575 ; 55 L. J. Ch. 845 55 L. T. 834 35 W. R.
M'Murdo, In
the
;
179
Macnamara
M'Neillie
v.
;
..........
;
o.
Dillon (1S83) II
Ir.
Acton (1853) 4 De
.
660
23 L. J. Ch. 11
. .
17 Jur.
. .
2 Eq. R. 21. 0. Daniels (1829) 10 B. & C. 263 5 Man. (O. S.) K. B. 14 McPherson v. Watt (1877) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 254 McQueen 0. Farquhar (1805) II Ves. 467
1041
1405
McPherson
&
Ry. 251
8 L. J. 507, 508
39 871
;
McQuire
v.
72 L. J. K. B. 612
;
"
509,510
53 L. T. 146
55 L. J. Ch. 18
...
;
33
3
Digitized
by Microsoft
clx
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
(1871) L. R. 6 Q. B. 612
;
Macrow v. G. W. Ry.
40 L.
J.
Q. B. 300
;
24 L. T.
256
;
1062, 1064 R. 286^C. A v. Alderson (1883) 52 L. J. Q. B. 737 ; 8 App. Ca. 467 ; 49 L. T. . 99, 100 303 31 W. R. 820H. L. (E.) Haddock, Religoz} 2 Ch. 220 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 567 ; 86 L. T. 644 ; 50 W. R. iioo, 1393 598 C. A. Magdalen College Hospital v. Knotts (1879) 4 App. Ca, 324 48 L. J. Ch. 390,618' 579 40 L. T. 466 ; 27 W. R. 602 Magnolia Metal Co. [1897] 2 Ch. 371 ; 66 L. J. Ch. 598 ; 76 L. T. 672 C. A. 1029 Magrett, Ex pane [1891] i Q. B. 413 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 339 55 J. P. 100 ; 39 W. R. 337 23 Maguire v. Liverpool Corporation [1905] i K. B. 767 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 369 ; 21 T. L. 92 L. T. 374; 69 J. P. 153 53 W. R. 449 3 L. G.: R. 485 R. 278 C. A. 404 1200 Maidlow 0. Maidlow [1914] P. 245 ; 84 L. J. P. 20 112 L. T. 804 C. A. Major o. Brandword (1630) Cro. Car. 260 551 Makin v. Watkinson (1871) 40 L. J. Ex. 33 ; L. R. 6 Ex. 25 23 L. T. 592 19W. R. 286 115 Malachy o. Soper (1836) 3 Bing. N. C. 371, 384 ; 3 Scott, 723 ; 6 L. J. Cj P. . 406,428 32; 2 Hodges, 217. Maleverer 0. Spinke (1537) Dyer, 35 b, 36 b . 790 Mallett V. Bateman (1865) L. R. i C. P. 163 1 H. & R. 109 ; 35 L. J. C. P. . . 290 40; 12 Jur. (N. S.) 122 ; 13 L. T. 410 14W. R. 225 Mallinson 0. Siddle (1870) 39 L. J. Ch. 426 ; 18 W. R. 569 590 Mallott V. Wilson [1903] 2 Ch. 494 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 664 89 L. T. 522 . 812 Malone v. Laskey [1907] 2 K. B. 141 ; 76 L. J. K. B. 1 134 ; 97 L. T. 324 23 T. L. R. 399 C. A. 329, 391 Manchester Corporation 0. Williams [1891] i Q. B. 94 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 23 ; 63L.T. 805; 39W. R. 302; 54 J. P. 712 . .10,346,521 Manchester &'01dham Bank 0. Cook (i,883j 49 L. T. 674 201 Manchester, Sheffield, &c., Ry. v. North Central Wagon Co. (i888) L. R. 13 App. Ca.. 554 58 L. J. Ch. 219 59 L. T. 730 37 W. R. 305 . 941 Manchester & Soilthport Ry. Co., Re (1854) 19 Beav. 365 . . 1362 Manchester Trust v. Furness [1895] 2 Q. B. 539 64 L. J. Q. B. 766 73 L. T. no 44 W. R. 17S 8 Asp. M. L. C. 57 14 R. 739 933 Manders 0. Williams (1849) 4 Exch. 588 18 L. J. Ex. 437 . . 417 Mangan 0. Atterton (1866) L. R. i Ex. 239 4 H. & C. 388 ; 35 L. J. Ex. 161 ; 14 W. R. 771 14 L. T. 411 334 Mangena v. Lloyd (1908) 24 T. L. R. 610 98 L. T. 640 ; reversed, 25 T. L. R. 26599L. T. 824 514 Mangena . Wright [1909] 2 K. B. 958 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 879 ; 100 L. T. 960 ; 509,514,527 S3 Sol. Jo. 485 ; 25 T. L. R. 534 Mangles v. Dixon (1852) i Mac. & G. 437 ; i Hall & Tw. 542 19 L. J. Ch. 240 142 Manks . Whiteley [191 1] 2 Ch. 448; 8b L. J. Ch. 696; 105 L. T. 504; reversed [1912] i Ch. 735 81 L. J. Ch. 457 106 L. T. 490 . 836 Manley 0. Field (1859) 7 C. B. N. S. 96 29 L. J. C. P. 79 ; 6 Jur. (N. S.) 300 464 Mann's Case (1867) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 459 n. Mann, &c., Ltd,, v. Land Registrar [1918] i Ch. 203 87 L. J. Ch. 81 ; 117 L. T. 705 ; 62 Sol. Jo. 54 ; 34 T. L. R. 39 1077 Manners v. Pearson [1898] i Ch. 581 67 L. J. Ch. 304 ; 78 L. T. 432 ; 46 W. R. 498C. A no Manning o. Andrews (1576) I Leon. 256 ; 4 Leon. 2 1263 Manning 0. Spooner (1796) 3 Ves. 114 1391,1392
53 L. J, Ch. 998
52 L. T. 35
33
W.
Maddison
;
'
...
.
....
.
....
; . ;
........
; ; ; ; . ; . . .
.
.981
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Manning v. Thesiger (1835) 3 My. & K. 29 Manning v. Wasdale (1836) 5 A. & E. 758 6 L. J. K. B. 59
;
.
clxi
PAGE
;
4 L. Nev.
;
J. Ch.
&
. 285 P. 172 2 H.
;
1274
& W.
.
43 1
710,715
.
Mannox
Greener (1872) L. R. 14 Eq. 456 27 L. T. 408 556, 562 Mansel's Settled Estates, iJe [1884] W. N. 209 919 Mansel . Norton (1883) 22 Ch. D. 769 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 357 48 L. T. 654 ; 31 W. R. 325C. A 1364 Mansell v. GrifiSn [1908] i K. B. 160 ; 98 L. T. 51 ; 72 J. P. 6 ; 24 T. L. R. i K. B. affirmed [1908] 67 947 ; 77 L. J. K. B. 676 ; 99 L. T. 132 ; 72 J. P. 179 24 T. L. R. 431 ; 6 L. G. R. 1:48 C. A. 436, 437, 1225 Mansell v. Mansell (1732) 2 P. Wms. 681 ; Cas. t. Talb. 252 2 Eq. Cas. Abr.
v.
;
.
747, pl- 6 756 Mansell (Lady) v. Mansell (Sir E.) (1757) Wilm. 36 872, 873 Mansell v. Valley Printing Co. [1908] 2 Ch. 441 77 L. J Ch. 742 99 L. T. 464 ; 84 T. L. R. 802 52 Sol. Jo. 660 C. A. . 419, 427, 429 Manser o. Back (1848) 6 Hare, 443. 126 Manvell v. Thomson (1826) 2 C. & P. 303 464, 467 Manzoni o. Douglas (1880) 6 Q. B. D. 145 ; 50 L. J. Q. B. 289 29 W. R. 425 45 J- P- 391 330 Mapey 0. Baker (1909) 73 J. P. 289 ; 7 L. G. R. 636 ; 53 Sol. Jo. 429 C. A. 527 "" ' " Mara o. Browne [1896] i Ch. 199 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 225 ; 73 L. T. 638 ; 44 W. R. 268 330 Maraver, In the Goods of {iZii) 1 Hagg. Eccl. 498 1255 March, Re (1883) 24 Ch. D. 222 reversed (1884) 27 Ch. D. 166 1087 March v. Lee (1670) i Cha. Ca. 162 ; 2 Vent. 337 817 Marchant v. Morton, Down & Co. [1901] 2 K. B. 829 ; 70 L. J. K. B. 820 85 L. T. 169 142 Margate Pier Co. v. Margate Corporation (1869) 20 L. T. 564 3 B. & Aid. 266; 22 R. R. 378 401 Marker o. Marker (1851^ 9 Hare, I 786,792 Market Overt Case (1596) 5 Rep. 83 a 946, 947 Markham o. Cobb (1626) Sir W. Jones, 147 Latch, 144 Noy, 82 ; Benloe,
.
......
;
. .
185
478
v.
Markham
Marks
V.
Paget [1908]
Ch. 697
77 L. J. Ch. 451
98 L. T. 605
;
24
T. L. R. 426
-63;
78 L. T. 607
;
Frogley [1898] i Q. B. 888 W. R. 548 19 Cox, C. C. 91 Marks 11. Samuel [1904] 2 K. B. 287 W. R. 88 ; 20 T. L. R. 430
;
67 L.
J.
Q. B. 605
46
442
53 501, 524
73 L. J. K. B. 587
;
90 L. T. 590
;
Markwick
361
v.
Hardingham
43 L. T. 647
29
W.
R.
Marlow v. Pitfield (1719) i P. Wms. 558 Marney O.Scott [1899] 1 Q.B. 986; 47W. R. 666; 68 L. J. Q. B. 736. Marquis of Bute v. Thompson (1844) 13 M. & W. 487 14 L. J. Ex. 9; Marriott II. Hunyton (1797) 7 T. R. 269 Marsden's Trusts, Re (1859) 28 L. J. Ch. 906
;
-23
332,355
. .
59.
239
. . v. Crutwell (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 328 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 504 Marshall, /i6eGoO(iso/ (1836) I Curt. 297 . Marshall, Re [1914] i Ch. 192 ; 83 L. J. Ch. 307 ; 109 L. T. 835 C. A. Marshall o. Berridge (1881) 19 Ch. D. 233 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 329 ; 45 L. T. 599 ; 46 J. P. 279 ; 30 Vl^. R. 93 Marshall v. Broadhurst (1831) i Cr. & J. 403 ; 9 L. J. (O. S.) Ex. 105 ; i Tyr.
Marshal
614
1405 1320
ir.
v.
Moore, 868
Brownl. 8
54
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
I
Marshall Marshall
v.
701, 702,
v.
719, 720 41
L. J. Q. B. 41 ; 25 L. T. 793 ; 20 W. R. 144 . . Marshalsea, Case of the (1613) 10 Co. Rep. 68' b, 75 Marten, Re [1902] i Ch. 314; 71 L. J. Ch. 203 ; 85 L. T. 704; 50
773
.
209 Martin v. Margham (1844) 14 Sim. 230 ; 13 L. J. Ch. 392 ; 8 Jur. 609 Martin o. Porter (1839) 5 M. &W. 351 2 H. &H. 70 Martin w. Power (1839) 5 M. & W. 351 Martin v. Price [1894] i Ch. 284 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 209 ; 7 R. 90 ; 70 L. T. 202 42 W. R. 262 C. A Martin v. Shoppee (1828) 3 C. & P. 373 Martin w. Strachan (1742) 5 T. R. 107 n Martin 0. Temperley (1843) 4 Q. B. 298 ; 3 G. & D. 497 ; 12 L. J. Q. B. 129
; . . .
............
W.
.
324)343 R. 869
.381
7^
;
991
373
432 389
;
351
;
64 L.
J. Ch. 9
71 L. T. 468
43
W. R.
1230
8 R.
v.
729
R. M.
S.
Martineaus
Co. (1912) 106 L. T. 638 ; 28 T. L. R. 364 ; 56 Sol. Jo. 445 ; 17 Com. Cas. 176 Martinez v. Gerber (1841) 3 M. & G. 88 ; 3 Scott (N. R.) 386 ; 10 L. J. C. P. 314; 5 Jur. 463 Marvin, Re [1905] 2 Ch. 490 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 699 ; 93 L. T. 599 ; 54 W. R. 74 ;
944 477
Mary, Duchess
V .
21 T. L. R. 765 of Sutherland,
.
.
Re ; Bechoflo. Bubna
C. A. Marys' (Robert) Case (1612) 9 Co. Rep. iii b ; 2 Brownl. 55, 146 Marzetti ii. Williams (1830) i B. & Ad. 415 ; 9 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. 42
31B 477
121,
124, 370
Maskell's and Goldfinch's Contract, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 525 ; 64 L. J. Ch. 678 ; 22. 898 72 L. T. 836 ; 43 W. R. 620 . Maskell v. Horner [1915] 3 K. B. 106 ; 84 L. J. K. B. 1752 ; 113 L. T. 126 ; 321 79 J. P. 406 ; 13 L. G. R. 808 ; 59 Sol. Jo. 429 ; 31 T. L. R. 332 C. A. . . . Mason, Re [1901] i Ch. 619 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 342 ; 84 L. T. 174 1267 Mason v. Bogg (1837) 2 My. & Cr. 443 ; i Jur. 330 1388 Mason v. Famell (1844) 12 M. & W. 674, 684 ; i D. & L. 576 ; 13 L. J. Ex.
.....
.
.
142 Masoii v. Harvey (1853) 8 Exch. 819 22 L. J. Ex. 336 Mason . Hill (1833) 5 B, & Ad. i 2 Nev. & M. 747 2 L. J. K. B. 118. Mason v. Keeling (1700) i Ld. Raym. 606
.
Mason Mason
v.
Lickbarrow (1790)
H.
Bl.
357
(1882) 7 P. D. 233 ; (1883) 8 P. D. 21 ; 52 L. J. P. 27 L. T. 290 ; 31 W. R. 361 C. Mason v. Shrewsbury Co. (1871) L. R. 6 Q. B. 578 ; 40 L. J. Q. B. 293 L. T. 239 ; 20 W. R. 14
v.
Mason
...... ......
; .
....
. .
423, 1268
48
710 360
921
48
.
1203
25
706, 710
;
Co.,
Re
(1885) 32 Ch.
D. 373
34W.R.
Masper
v.
55 L. J. Ch. 666
;
739
(1876)
i
1346
C. P.
Brown
D. 97
45 L. J. C. P. 203
;
34 L. T. 254
24
439i 472 53
W.
Masson
R. 369
.
De
K. B. 831
i
loi L. T. 476
;
25 T. L. R. 784
;
934
Ch. 32I
Master's Settlement,
55 Sol. Jo. 170
Re
[1911]
Master D. Miller (1791) 4 T. R. 340. Masters v. Pollie (1620) 2 Rolle Rep. 141
.......
80 L. J. Ch. 190
103 L. T. 899
873, 87s
497 780
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Mather v. Fraser (1856) 25 L. J. Ch. 360 ; 2 Kay & J. 536 2 Jur. (N. S.) 900 4 W. R. 387 Mather v. Lord Maidstone (1856) i C. B. N. S. 273 ; 26 L. J. C. P. 58 ; 3
;
clxiii
PAGE
17
Mathew
Jur. (N. S.) 112; 5 W. R. 163. t/. Brise (1851) 14 Beav. 341
v. v.
Biddulph (1841) 3 M. & G. 390 438 Feaver {ijiS) i Cox, 278 ; i R. R. 39 1058, 1062 Mathieson, ii(i9i8) 87L. J. Ch. 445; 119 L. T. 18 C. A. 1220 Matthews v. Baxter (1873) L. R. 8 Ex. 132 42 L. J. Ex. 73 ; 28 L. T. 169, 669; 21 W. R. 389, 741 28,977 Matthews v. Matthews (1859) 29 L. J. P. & M. 118 2 L. T. 472 6 Jur. (N. S.) 659 8 W. R. 591 I Sw. & Tr. 499 affirmed 3 Sw. & Tr.
Mathews Mathews
.......
. . . . . . . . : ; ; ;
94
1235
161
Matthews Matthews
Ruggles-Brise [1911] i Ch. 194; 80 L. J. Ch. 42 ; 103 L. T. 491 v. Smallwood [1910] i Ch. 777 ; 79 L. 102 L. T. 228 J. Ch. 322 Matthieson v. Clarke (1854) 3 Drew. 3 24 L. J. Ch. 202 ; 18 Jur. 1020; 3 W. R. 2 Matts V. Hawkins (18 1 3) 5 Taunt. 20
zi.
; ;
............
; ;
1195 1138
799
1
Maunder
v.
Venn
(1829)
M.
& M.
......
. . . .
. .
323
Maundrell 11. Maundrell (1804) 10 Ves. 246 Maxim-Nordenfelt Case [1894] A. C. 535 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 749 ; 69 L. T. 471 ; 42 W. R. 38 42 Maxwell !(. Martin (1830) 6 Bing. 522 May V. Burdett (1846) 9 Q. B. loi 16 L. J. Q. B. 64 ; 10 Jur. 692 361, 453 May V. Lane (1894) 64 L. J. Q. B. 236 14 R. 149 ; 71 L. T. 869 ; 43 W. R. 193 C. A 141, 365, 496 May V. Piatt [1900] i Ch. 616 69 L. J. Ch. 357 ; 83 L. T. 123 48 W. R. 617 38 Mayfair Property Co., Re [1898] 2 Ch. 28 67 L. J. Ch. 337 78 L. T. 302 ; 1008 46 W. R. 465 14 T. L. R. 336 5 Mans. 127 C. A. Mayfair Property Co. v. Johnston [1894] i Ch. 508 63 L. J. Ch. 399 ; 8 R. 781 ; 70 L. T. 485 405, 1085 Mayfield v. Wadsley (1824) 3 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 31 3 B. & C. 357 5 D. & R. 114 224 Mayhew v. Eames (1825) 3 B. & C. 601 4 D. & R. 484 ; i C. & P. 550 ; 3 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 108 64 Mayhew o. Herrick (1849) 7 C. B. 229 18 L. J. C. P. 179 13 Jur. 1078 418 Mayhew v. Suttle (1854) 4 E. & B. 347 3 C. L. R. 59 24 L. J. Q. B. 54 i Jur. (N. S.) 303 643 3 W. R. 108 Mayor o. Pine (1825) 3 Bing. 285 321 Mead, Re (1880) 15 Ch. D. 651 50 L. J. Ch. 30 43 L. T. 117 28 W. R.
.
.718
891
1292, 1293
Mead
Meats
V. V.
426 igo Mecca, The [1895] P. 95 64 L. J. P. 40 ; 71 L. T. 711 ; 43 W. R. 209 "4 7 Asp. M. L. C. 529 ; 1 1 R. 742 C. A Mediana, The [1900] A. C. 16 69 L. J. Q. B. 35 ; 48 W. R. 398 82 L. T. 95 37 16 T. L. R. 194 ; 9 Asp. M. C. 41 H. L. (E.) 596 Medows, Re [1898] i Ch. 300 67 L. J. Ch. 145 78 L. T. 13 ; 46 W. R. 297 Meek v. Chamberlain (1881) 8 Q. B. D. 31 ; 51 L. J. Q. B. 99 46 L. T. 344 ; 1324 30 W. R. 228 1051 . Meek v. Kettlewell (1843) i Ph. 342 13 L. J. Ch. 28 ; 7 Jur. 1120 Melling 0. Leak (1855) 16 C. B. 652 ; 3 C. L. R. 1017 24 L. J. C. P. 187 ; i . . 643,644 3 W. R. 595 Jur. (N. S.) 759
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; . ; . . . . i
.........
S.
1406
850
31 L. J. C. P. 220
6 L. T.
/2
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxiv
TABLE OF CASES
V.
Baddeley (1834) 2
Cr.
& M.
675
4 Tyr. 962
6 C.
&
P. 374
L. J. Ex. 217
o. V.
490
386, 679, 717
Ch, 475
;
93 L. T. 574
53
W.
Melville
R. 581
v.
21 T. L. R.
S91 C.
A.
Aiicketill (1909) 25 T. L.
R. 655 C. A.
Melwich v. Luter (1588) 4 Rep! 26 Mendes v. Me'ndes (1747) 3 Atk. 619 ; i Ves. Sen. 8 Menetone v. Athawse (1764) 3 Burr. 1592 132, 224 Mennie v. Blake (1856) 6 E. & B. 842 25 L. J. Q. B. 399 ; 2 Jur. (N.5.) 413 953 4 W. R. 739 Mentney v. Petty (1722) Pre. Ch. 593 1309 Menzies o. Breadalbane (1828) 3 Bligh (N. S.) 414 772 Mercantile Bank of London v. Evans [1899] 2 Q. B. 613 68 L. J. Ch. 921 i47 81 L. T. 376 15 T. L. R. 535C. A. Mercantile Bank of Sydney v. Taylor [1893] A. C. 317 ; 57 J. P. 741 155. 3i
;
'
773 1335 59
502
;
55 L. J. Q. B. 558
54 L. T, 720
1061
;
Mercer
Denne
[1905]
; .
93 L. T. 412
. .
Mercer . Irving (1858) El. Bl. & E!.'s63 27 L. J. Q. B. 291 5 Jur. (N. S.) 143; 6 W. R, 661 Merchant Taylors' Co. o. A.-G. (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 512 40 L. J. Ch. 545 ; 25 L. T. 109 19 W. R. 641 Mercler v. Mercier [1903] 2 Ch. 98; 72 L. J. Ch. 511 88 L. T. 516; 51 W. R. 6ii C. A. Meredith. Joans (1632)' Cro. Car. 244 Merest . Harvey (1814) 5 Taunt. 442 i Marsh. 15 R. R. 548 139 Merivale v. Carson (1887) 20 Q. B. D. 275 58 L. T. 33: 36 W. R. 231 ; 52
; ; . . ; ;
. .
50
1
103
...
J- P- 261
Merle
Wells (1810) 2 Camp. 413 Merry v. Green (1841) 7 M. & W. 623 10 L. J. M. C. 154 . 921, Merryvs^eather o. Moore [1892] 2 CK 518 ; 61 L'. J. Cli. 505 66L. T. 719 40 W. R. 540 Merryweather 1). Nixan (1799) 8 T. R. 186 16 R. R. 810 Mersey Docks v. Gibbs (1866) L. R. i H. L. 93; 11 )H. L. Cas. 686; 35 L. J. Ex. 225 12 Jur. (Jf. S.) 571 ; 14 L. T. 677 14 W. R. 872o.
; . : ; . . . ; ;
,
....... ..........
; . .
.
509, 526
292 924
210 337
~ H. L. (E-.) 340 Mersey Steel & Iron Co. v. Naylor (1884) 51 L. J. Q. B. 576 9 Q. B. D. 648 120, 146, 147, 148 47 L. T. 369 31 W. R. 83 Re Merten's Patent [1915] i K. B. 8^7 ; 84 L. J. K. B. looi 112 L. T. 313 ; 20 Com. Cas. 189 j 32 R. P. C. 109 ; 59 Sol. Jo. 216 ; 31 T. L. R. 162 '. C. A 31B Merttens v. Hill [1901] i Ch. 842 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 489 ; 65 J. P. 312 ; 49 W. R. 408 ; 17 T. L. R. 289 607 Messenger v. Armstrong (1785) i T. R. 53 619 Messenger v. Clarke (1850) 5 Exch. 388 19 L. J. Ex. 306 ; 14 Jur. 74S 1184 Metcalf,7 A GooiiJf 0/(1822) I Add. 343 1341 Metropolitan Assoc, v. Petch (1858) 5 C. B. N. S. 504, 512 27 L. J. C. P. 330 ; 4 Jur. (N. S.) 1000 396 Metropolitan Asylum Board v. Hill (i88i) L. R. 6 App. Cas. 193 ; 44 L. T. W. R. 617 47 L. T. 29 45 J. P. 664 50 L. J.. Q. B. 353 653 29 H.L. (E.) 345,402
; ; ;
. .
......
; ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Metropolitan
ckv
PAGE
201
Pooley (1885) L. R. 10 App. Cas. 210 54 L. J. Q. B. L. T. 163 33 W. R. 709 497, 49 J. P. 756 Ry. v. G. W. Ry. (iqoi) 84 L. T. 333 C. A. Ry. i/. Jackson (1877) L. R. 3 App. Cas. 197 ; 47 L. J. C. P. 303 ; 679 26 W. R. 175 H. L. Ry. v. Wright (1886) L. R. 11 App. Cas. 152 55 L. J. Q. B. 401 658 ; 34 W. R. 746 H. L. (E.) Saloon Co. v. Hawkins (1859) 4 H. & N. 146 5 Jur. (N. S.)
v.
; ;
Bank
..
;
498 707
330 372
521
Metropolitan Water Board v. Dick, Kerr & Co. [1918! A. C. 119 87 L. J. K. B. 370 117 L. T. 766 82 J. P. 61 16 L. G". R. I 23 Com. Cas. 62 Sol. Jo. 102; 34T. L. R. 113 H. L. (E.) 148 133 Mette V. Mette (1859) i Sw. & Tr. 416 28 L. J. P. & M. 117; 7 W. R. 543 1 173 Meux V. Cobley [1892] 2 Ch. 253 61 L. J. Ch. 449 66 L. T. 86 577, 626 Meux V. G. E. Ry. [1895] 2 Q. B. 387 64 L. J. Q. B. 657 14 R. 620 73 L. T. 247 336, 429 43 W. R. 680 59 J. P. 662 C. A. Meux Brewery . City of London Electric Light Co. [1895] i Ch. 287; 64 L. J. Ch. 216 12 R. 112 C. A. 72 L. T. 34; 43 W. R. 238 377, 378, 396, 401 Mews . Mews (1852) 15 Beav. 529 1184 Mexican and South American Co., Re (1859) 4 De G. & J. 544 28 L. J. Ch. 1014 7 W. R. 681 769 5 Jur. (N. S.) 1191 Meyer o. Dresser (1864) i6 C. B. N. S. 646 33 L. J. C. P. 289 10 L. T. 612 12 W. R. 983 loj Meyerstein v. Barber (1866) JL- R. 2 C. P. 38 943, 949, 954 Meynell . Howard (1696) Pre. Ch. 61 . Michael 0. Fripp (1868) L. R. 7 Eq. 95 17 W. R. 23 1233 19 L. T. 257 Michael o. Gay (1858) I F. & F. 409 1065 Michael v. Hart [1901] 2 K. B. 867 70 L. J. K. B. 1000 85 L. T. 548 50 W. R. 154 17 T. L. R. 761 [1902] I K. B. 482 71 L. J. K. B. 26? 86 L. T. 474 61 L. J. Ch. 326 66 L. T. 366 40 W. R. 375 Michell, Re [1892] 2 Ch. 87 1304, 1319 Micklethwait v. Vincent (1892) 67 L. T. 225 770 Micklethwaite v. Micklcthwaite (1857) i De G. & J. 504 26 L. J. Ch. 721 786 5 W. R. 861 3 Jur. (N. S.) 1279 Micklethwaite 0. Newlay Bridge Co. (1886) 33 Ch. D. 133; 5s L. T. 336; 51 J. P. 132 C. A 778 Middleton . Chichester (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. 152 40 L. J. Ch. 237 24 L. T. 1 19 W. R. 299 144 173 10 L. T. 408 12 W. R. 706 840 Middleton v. Magnay (1864) 2 H. ^ M. 233 Middleton 0. Sherburne (i84i)4yo. &C. 351 36 Middleton p. Spicer (1783) I Bro. C. C. 201 ^ 753 Midgley v. Midgley [1893] 3 Ch. 282 62 L. J. Ch. 905 69 L. T. 241 41 1383,1420 W. R. 659 2 R. 561C. A 1170 Midgley p. Wood (i860) 30 L. J. P. M. & A. 57 Midwood V. Manchester Corp. [1905] 2 K. B. 597 7+ L. J. K. B. 884 69 J. P. 348 ; 54 W. R. 37 93 L. T. 525 21 T. L. R. 667 ; 3 L. G. R. 1 136 C. A 345 63 L. J. Q. B. 593 Mighell V. Sultan of Johore [1894] i Q. B. 149 9 R. 447
; ; ; ;
....
; .
.......
;
.
.819
.
'.122
......
;
;
58 J. P. 244 C. 48 L. J. C. P. 695 Migotti V. Colville (1879) 4 C. P. D. 233 27 W. R. 744 14 Cox C. C. 305 Mildmay's Case (1606) 6 Rep. 40 a Mildmay v. Hungerford (169 1) 2 Vern. 245
70 L. T. 64
341
;
40 L. T. 747
67, 70, 71
5^4 590
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxvi
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Forest
. . Co. (1918) 62 Sol. Jo. 634 ; 34 T. L. R. 500 V. New Zealand Alford Estate Co. (1886) 55 L. J. Ch. 801 ; 32 Ch. D. 266 ; 54 L. T. 582 ; 34 W. R. 669 C. . ,. . . Millard's Case (1678) 2 Freem. 43 ,. ., . . Millard, Re (1895) 72 L. T. 823 C; A. ; reversing 2 Manson, 56
Miles Miles
V.
Rock
406
1417 Millbourn v. Lyons [i 914] i Ch. 34 83 L. J. Ch. 737 ; [1914] 2 Ch. 23 1 1 1 803 L. T. 388 ; 58 Sol. jo. 578 C, A . . Millechamp . Johnson (1746) Willes, 265 n. 745 Millen o. Hawery (1625) Latch, 13 386 Miller o, David (1874) L. R. 9 C. P. 1-18 43 L. J. C. P. 84 ; 30 L. T. 58 ; 22 510 W. R. 332 Miller v. Dell [1891] i Q. B. 468 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 404; 63 L. T. 693 39 W. R. 342C. A. 422, 947 Miller v. Douglas (1886) 56 L. J. Ch. 91 ; 55 L, T. 583 1132 35 W. R. 122 Miller v. Miller (1735) 3 P. Wms. 356 1291, 1292 Miller o. Race (1758) I Burr. 452 415,420,938,1142 Milligan v. Wedge (1840) 12 A. & E. 737 4 P. & D. 714 ; i Q. B. 714 ; 10 L. J. Q. B. 19 354 Millington 0. Fox (1838) 3 Myl. & Cr. 338 1029 121 L. T. 254 ; 17 Mills 0. Brooker [1919] i K. B, 555 ; 88 L. J. K. B. 950 L. G. R. 238; 62.S0L Jo. 431 84 35 T. L. R. 261 . Mills 0. Capel (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 692 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 674; 33 L. T. 158 570 MiUs 0. Colchester (Mayor of) (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 476 36 L. J. C. P. 210 16L. T. 626; 15W. R. 955'. 745 2 Am. 62 ; 8 L. J. Mills v. Fowkes (1839) 7 Scott, 444 ; 5 Bing. N. C. 455 C. P. 276 ; 3 Jur. 406 . Mills o. Graham (1804) i B. & P. N. R. 140 ; 8 R. R. 767 . 347 126 Mills V. Haywafd (1877) 6 Ch. D. 196 C. A . Mills 7>. Millward (1890) 1.5 P. D. 20 ; 59 L. J. P. 23 ; 61 L. T. 651 124& 81 L. J. Ch. 210,; 105 L. T. Mills V. United Counties Bank [1912] i Ch. 231 742 ; 28 T. L. R. 40 C. A . . Millward v. Littlewood (1850) 5 Ex. 775 ; 20 L. J. Ex. 2 129 Milner's Safe Co. v. G. N. Ry. [1907] i Ch. 208 76 L. J. Ch. 99 96 L. T. 130 23 T. L. R. 88 C. A 708 Milner's Settlement, Re [1891] 3 Ch. 547 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 84 65 L. T. 310 40 W. R. 76 46 Milnes, iic(i885) 53 L. T. 534; 33 W. R'. 927 1276 Mibes 0. Gery (1807) 14 Ves. 400 ; 9 R. R. 307 185 Milroy 0. Lord (1862) 4 De G. F. & J. 264 8 Jur. (N. S.) 31 L. J. Ch. 798 iioi 806; 7L. T. 178 Milward v. Thanet (Earl of) (1801) 5 Ves. 720 n. 126 5 R. R. 150 n. Miner v. Gilmour (1858) 3 L. T. 98; 12 Moo. P. C. 156; 7 W. R. 328 403,771 Mirams, .Re [1891] i Q. B. 594; 60 L. J. Q. B. 397; 64 L. T. 117; 39 W. R. 464 8 Morr. 59 998, 999 Mires v. Solebay (1677) ^ Mod. 242 419 Mitchell, Re [1913] i Ch. 201 ; 82 L. J. Ch. 121 108 L. T. 34; sub nom. Mitchell, / re; Truelovec. Mitchell, 57 Sol. Jo. 213 . 985 Mitchell 0. Alestree (1677) I Vent. 295 361 Mitchell 0. Homfray (1881) 8 Q. B. D. 587 50 L. J. Q. B. 460 45 L. T. .694; 29W. R. 558 35 Mitchell v. Jenkms (1833) 5 B. & Ad. 588 ; 2 N. & M. 301 3 L. J. K. B.
.
94 756
....
; ; ; .
....
.
.114
.828
.
.....
; .
.......
; . . . ; ; ; ;
35.
33Si 493
44 L.
J.
Q. B.
251
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Mitchell
V.
;
ckvii
PAGE
Mosley [1913] W. N. 43 57 Sol. Jo. 340 ; 29 T. L. R. 273 109 L. T. 648 [1914] I Ch. 438 ; 83 L. J. Ch. 135 58 Sol. Jo. 218 ; 30 T. L. R. 29 C. A 74, 777, Moens v. Heyworth (1842) 10 M. & W. 147 10 L. J. Ex. 177 Moeser v. Wisker (1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 120 ; 40 L. J. C. P. 94 24 L. T. 134 19W. R. 351 Moet V. Pickering (1878) 8 Ch. D. 172 47 L. J. Ch. 527 ; 38 L. T. 799 26 W. R. 637
; ; ;
.
842
541
320
205
Moffatt
V.
Bateman
(1869) L. R. 3 P. C. 115;
22 L. T. 140
6 Moore,
P. C. (N. S.) 360 iJ. Mogg (1824) 2 Add. 292 Mogul S.S. V. Macgregor (1889) 23 Q. B. D. 598 W.R. 756; 53 J. P. 709
259
Mogg
H93
;
58 L. J. Q. B. 465
;
37 481,484. 1333
63 L. J. P. C.
. .
Powell (1730) at
Wms. 267
;
footnote
Camroux (1849) 4 Exch. 17 18 L. J. Ex. 356 Molyneux v. Hawtrey [1903] 2 K. B. 487 72 L. J. K. B. 873
;
...
.
; ; ;
89 L. T. 350 R. 23 186 Molyneux v. Richard [1906] i Ch. 34 75 L. J. Ch. 39 ; 93 L. T. 698 ; 54 W. R. 177 ; 22 T. L. R. 76 127 Monckton, Re [1913] 2 Ch. 636 ; 83 L. J. Ch. 34 109 L. T. 624 57 Sol. Jo. 836 754 Monckton v. Payne [1899] 2 Q. B. 603 68 L. J. Q. B. 951 81 L. T. 204 '591 48W. R. 44; 15T. L. R. 531 Mondel 0. Steel (184:) 8 M. & W. 858 i D. (N. S.) i ; 10 L. J. Ex. 426 124 Monmouth Canal Co. v. Harford (1834) i C. M. & R. 614 5 Tyrw. 68 4 L. J. Ex. 43 850 Monson's S. E., Re [1898] i Ch. 427 67 L. J. Ch. 176 78 L. T. 225 ; 46 W. R. 330 ; 14 T. L. R. 247 883 Monson v. Tussaud, Ltd. [1894] i Q. B. 671 ; 63 L. J. Q. B. 454 9 R., 177 ; 70 L. T. 335 ; 58 J. P. 524 C. A 376, 500 Montagu, Re [1896] 1 Ch. 549 65 L. J. Ch. 372 ; 74 L. T. 346 44 W. R. 583 1281 Montagu v. Forward (1893) 2 Q. B. 350 69 L. T. 371 : 42 W. R. 124 65 Montague v. Sandwich (Earl) (1886) 32 Ch. D. 525 ; 55 L. J. Ch. 925 54 L. T. 502 C. A 1284 Montefiore 0. Brown (1858) 7 H. L. C. 241 873 4 Jur. (N. S.) 1201 Montefiore v. Guedalla (1859) : De G. F. & J. 93 i L. T. 29 L. J. Ch. 65 1282 251; 6 Jur. (N.S.) 329; 8 W.R. 53 Montefiore v. Guedalla [1903] 2 Ch. 723 52 W. R. 151 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 13 1 107 89 L. T. 472 Montefiore v. Menday Co. [1918] 2 K. B. 241 87 L. J. K. B. 907; 119 L. T. 340 ; 62 Sol. Jo. 585 42 34 T. L. R. 463 661 Monyppnny c. Dering (1847) 16 M. & W. 418 Monypenny o. Dering (1852) 2 De G. M. & G. 145 ; 22 L. J. Ch. 313 ; 17 i73 J'ir-4S7 Moodie v. Garnon (1616) i Roll. Rep. 330; Moo. 848; Cro. Jac. 390; 3 Bulstr. 153 796 870 Moodie o. Reid(i8i6) I Madd. 516; 16 R. R. 257 Moody V. Steggles (1879) '^ Ch. D. 261 48 L. J. Ch. 639 ; 41 L. T. 25 713 Moon . Towers (1860)8 C. B.(N. S.) 611 58 1309 Moor . Barham (1723) I P. Wms. 53 Moore, /Ae G00& o/[i892] P. 14s ; 61 L. J. P. 119 1339 Moore, Re [1901] i Ch. 936 70 L. J. Ch. 358 ; 84 L. T. 501 ; 17 T. L. R. 1073 356 49 W. R. 484
52
W.
....
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxviii
TABLE OF CASES
Darton (1851) 4 De G.
Drinkwater (1858) i F. & F. 134 413 o. Meagher (1807) i Taunt. 39 3 Smith, 135 523 v. Metropohtan Railway Co. (1872) L. R. 8 Q. B: 36 ; 42 L. J. Q. B. 21 W. R. 145 27 L. T. 579 23 352 Moore v. Moore (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 474 ; 43 L. J. Ch. 617 30 L. T. 752 22 W. R. 729 984, 1293 Moore 0. Plymouth (Lord) (1817) 7 Taunt. 614 671,722 Moore o. Robinson (1^31) 2 B. & Ad. 817 ; i L. J. K. B. 4 408, 412, 921 Moore v. Singer Manufacturing Co. [1904] i K. B. 820 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 457 68 J. P. 369 C. A. . 973 52 W. R. 385 20 T. L. R. 366 Moore . Voughton (1816) I Stark. 487 . Moran v. Pitt (1873) 42 L. J. Q. B. 47 ; 28 L. T. 554 21 W. R. 525 947 Morant, In the Goods qf{i&74) L. R. 3 P. cfe M. 151 ; 43 L. J. P. 16 ; 30 L. T. 1334 74 22 W. R. 267 Mordan, Re [1905] i Ch. 515 92 L. T. 488 ; 53 W. R. 74 L. J. Ch. 319 .1117 599 C. A. Mordaunt v. British Oil Mills [1910] 2 K. B. 502 ; 79 L. J. K. B. 967 ; 103 L. T. 217; 54 Sol. Jo. 654 15 Com. Cas. 285 923 Mordaunt v. Mordaunt (1870) L. R. 2 P. & M. 382 ; 41 L. J. M. 42 26 L. T. 8i2 20 W. R. 553 347 Morel V. Westmoreland (Earl of) [1903] i K. B. 64 72 L. J. K. B. 66 ; 87 L. T. 635 ; 51 W. R. 290 56 Mores . Conham (1609) Owen, 123 2 Brownl. 273 557 Morgan, In the Goods of (1866) L. R. i P. & M. 214 35 L. J. P. 98 ; 14 L. T. 894 ; 14 W. R. 1022 . . 1238 Morgan, Re (1881) 18 Ch. D. 93 50 L. J. Ch. 834 ; 45 L. T. 183 ; 30 W. R. 223 C. A. 1350, 1407 Morgan, Re [1893] 3 Ch. 222 62 L. J. Ch. 789 ; 69 L. T. 407 C. A. . 992 Morgan v. Davies (1878) 3 C. P. D. 260 26 W. R. 816 70 Fear [1907] A. C. 425 L. J. Ch. 660 Morgan 0. 76 857 Morgan 0. Hughes (1788) 2 T. R. 225 489, 490 Morgan v. Jackson [1895] i Q. B. 885 ; 64 L. J. Q. B. 462 ; 72 L. T. 593 722 59 J. P. 327; 43 W.R. 479; 15 R. 411 Morgan v. Jeffreys [1910] i Ch. 620 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 360 ; 74 J. P. 154 26 T. L. R. 324 830 Morgan 0. Lingen (1863) 8 L. T. 800 J25 Morgan 0. Milman (1853) 3 De G. M. & G. 24 22 L. J. Ch. 897 ; 17 Jur. I W. R. 143 193 99 Morgan . Morgan (i 841) 2 Curt. 679 1195 R. 10 Eq. 99 ; 39 L. J. Ch. 493 Morgan o. Morgan (1870) 22 L. T. 59 j ; 18W. 1r. 744 666 Morgan v. Ravey (1861) 6 H. & N.^265 30 L. J. Ex. 131 ; 3 L. T. 784 ; 9 W. R. 376 245 Morgan o. Scudamore (1677) 2 Ch. Rep. 70 595 Morgan 0. Stable (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 6i i : 41 L. J. Q. B. 260 26 L. T..906 367 Morgan w. Thomas (1853) 8 Exch.. 302 ; 22 L. J. Ex. 152 17 Jur. 283 1347 Morgan v. Vale of Neath Ry. (186;) L. R. i Q. B. 149 5 B. & S. 736 35 L. J. Q. B. 23; 13'L. T. 56<t; 14W. R. 144 448 Morison v. Thompson (1874) L.'R. 9 Q. B. 480; 43 L. J. Q. B. 215 ; 30 T. 869 22 W. R. 859 L. 209, 23s Morley o. Bird (1798) 3 Ves. 628 ; 4 R. R. io6 1088, 1090, 1091, 1093, 1288 Morley 11. Clifford (1882) 20 Ch. D. 753 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 687 46 L. T. 561 ; 30 W. R. 606 , 717
0.
; ; ; ; . ; ;
B.
v.
Denn
(1800) 2 B.
PAGE
16
&
20 L. J. Ch. 626
983,1292
.116
.
.........
; ; ; . . . ;
.....
;
<
....
. . . . . .
.
.........
.
.... ......
; ;
....... .......
;
.....
; ; ; . ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Morley v. Hay (1828) 7 L. J. (O. S.) 104 3 M. & Ry. 696 Morley v. Pincombe (1848) 2 Exch. loi 18 L. J. Ex. 272 Morrant v. Gough (1827) 7 B. & C. 206 : Man. & Ry. 41
; ; ;
clxix
..
.
PAGE
. .
Morrell
v.
Cowan
47 L.
.
J.
Ch. 73
.
;
.
31 R. R- 171 ; 37 L. T. 586 ; 26
.
. W. R. 90 . . . . . 292 Morrell v. Martin (1841) 3 M. & G. 581 ; 4 Scott (n. r.) 300 ; 1 1 L. J. M. C. 22 343 Morris's Estate, Re (1874) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 68 ; 44 L. J. Ch. 178 ; 31 L. T. 1382 491 ; 23 W. R. 120 Morris, Re [1908] i K. B. 473 ; 77 L. J. K. B. 265 ; 98 L. T. 500 962, 968 Morris 0. Baron cSc Co. [1918] A. C. i ; 87 L. J. K. B. 145 ; 118 L. T. 34
.
(E.) 145 6 Jur. (N. S.) Barrett (1859) 7 C. B. N. S. 139 ; 29 L. J. C. P. 102 68 609 ; I L. T. 38 ; 8 W. R. 45 Morris o. Davies (1836) 5 CI. & F. 163 i Jur. 911 1207 Morris v. Dimes (1834) i A. & E. 654 3 Nev. & M. 671 3 L. J. K. B. 170 703 Morris v. Howes (1845) 4 Ha. 599 i6 L. J. Ch. 121 ; 10 Jur. 955 906, 975 Morris v. MacCuUoch (1763) 2 Eden, 190 Ambl. 432 42 Morris v. Morris (1858) 3 De G. & J. 323 28 L. J. Ch. 329 5 Jur. (N. S.)
H. L.
o.
Morris
....
.
791 229 7 W. R. 249 421 Morris v. Robinson (1824) 3 B. & C. 206 5 D. & R. 35 27 R. R. 322 1009 Morrison, Re [1914] i Ch. 50 Morritt, Re (1886) 18 Q. B. D. 222 56 L. T. 42 56 L. J. Q. B. 139 35 W. R. 277C. A 949>9S5 ^ ^ 870 Morse v. Martin (1865) 34 Beav. 500 Mortgage Insurance Corpn. v. Canadian Co. [1901] 2 Ch. 377 70 L. J. Ch. loii 684 ; 84 L. T. 861 Mortimer, Re [1905] 2 Ch. 502 74 L. J. Ch. 745 93 L. T. 459 659, 661 48 L. J. Ch. 470 Mortiraore v. Mortimore (1879) L. R. 4 App. Cas. 448 27 W. R. 575 affirming 37 L. T. 520 Mortimore v. Wright (1840) 6 M. & W. 482 9 L. J Morton, In the Goods 0/(1887) '2 P- D- H' 5^ I- J- P51 J. P. 680; 35 W.R. 735 Morton v. Lamb (1797) 7 T. R. 125 ; 4 R. R. 395 Morton v. Woods (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 658 Moseley v. Rendell (1871) L. R. 6 Q. B. 338 ; 40 L. 774; 19 W. R. 619 Moseley v. Virgin (1796) 3 Ves. 134 i Morr. 244 Moser, Re (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 738 33 W. R. 16 8; L. T. 596 ; 18 T. L. Moses, Re [1902] i Ch. 100 71 L. J. Ch. loi 1264 147C. A. 3'5 Moses V. Macpherlan (1760) 2 Burr. 1005 i W. Bl. 219 874 Mosley . Mosley (1800) 5 Ves. 248 Mosley v. Walker (1827) 7 B.'& C. 40 9 Dow. & Ry. (K. B.) 863 ; 5 L. J 694 31 R. R. 146 (O. S.) K. B. 358 646 Moss V. Gallimore (1779) i Dougl. (K. B.) 279 208 Moss V. Hall (1850) 5 Exch. 46 ; 19 L. J. Ex. 205 Moss V. Hancock [1899] 2 Q. B. 1 1 1 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 657 ; 80 L. T. 693 ; 47 414. W. R. 698 ; 15 T. L. R. 353 ; 19 Cox C. C. 324 63 J. P. 517 420, 938 1173, MosS V. Moss [1897] P. 263 66 L. J. P. 154 77 L. T. 220 45 W. R. 635 1 176
;
........
; ;
;
Mostyn v. Fabrigas (1774) i Cowp. 161 Mott V. Buxton (1802) 7 Ves. 201 Mott V. Sihoplbred (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 22
34'
755
;
44 L.
J.
Ch. 380
,23
W. R.
545
395^
396, 851
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxx
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
s.
Moule
41 J. Ex. 62
26 L. T. 367
20
W. R. 416 629, 632 Moult V. Halliday [1898] i Q. B. 125 ; 67 L. J. Q. B. 451 ; 77 L. T. 794 212 46 W. R. 318; 62 J. P. 8 Mounsey 0. Ismay (1863) i H. & C. 729 32 L. J. Ex. 94 ; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 306 7 L. T. 717 ; II W. R. 270 ; (1865) 3 H. & C. 486 ; 34 L. J. Ex. 52 ; 12 L. T. 27 II Jur. (N. S.) 141 13 W. R. 521 679, 744, 745, 746, 858 Mountain v. Bennet (1787) i Cox, 353 12561 1258
; ; ; ; . .
.
Mount-Cashell (Earl)
v.
More-Smyth [1896] A.
0.
;
C. 158
65 L. J. P. C. 12
. .
1304,1312
Inland Revenue Commissioners [1911] 2 K. B. 24 ; 80 L. J. K. B., 503 27 T. L. R. 298 55', 616 Mounttord v. Gibson (1804) 4 East, 441 ; i Smith, 129 7 R. R. 599 1345 Mountgarret's Will, Re [1919] 2 Ch. 294 88 L. J. Ch. 405 121 L. T. 414 63 Sol. Jo.. 626; 35 T. L. R. 585 561 Mountjoy o. Huntington (1583) Godb. 17 684, 685 Mousley v. Ludlam ((851) 21 L. J. Q. B. 64 625 15 Jur. 1107 Mowbray 0. Odrich (1333) 2 Wils. 24 Moxham, The M^ (1876) L. R. i P. D. 107 ; 46 L. J. P. 17 ; 34 L. T. 559 24 W. R. 650 339 Moxhay 0. Inderwick (1847) I De G. & S. 708 Moxon V. Berkeley Building Society (1890) 59 L. J. Ch. 524 62 L. T. 250 836 Moxon V. Bright (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. 292 20 L. T. 961 378 .' Moyle's Ca*e (1599) Noy, 70 . 672 Muggleton . Barnett (1857) 2 H. & N. 653 27 L. J. Ex. 125 4 Jur. (N. S.) 139 ; 6 W. R. 182 1299, '32 Mulcahy o. R. (1868) L. R. 3 H. L. 317 I. R. i C. L. 13. 481 Mulgrave 0. Qgden (1591) Cro. Eliz. 219 416 Mullens c. Miller (1882) 22 Ch. D. 194 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 380 48 L. T. 103 31 W. R. 559 126, 229 Muller 0. Trafford [1901] i Ch. 54 70 L. J. Ch. 72'; 49 W. R. 132 . 6i6 Mullett o. Challis (1851) 16 Q. B. 239 20 L. J. Q. B. 161 ;,15 Jur. 243 530 Mulligan o. Cole (1875) L.R. 10 Q.B. 549; 44L. J. Q. B. 153 33 L. T. 12. .508, 510 MuUiner v. Florence (1878) L. R. 3 Q. B. D. 484 47 L. J. Q.-B. 700 38 L. T. 167 26 W. R. 385 C. A 247, 416, 961 Mulroony v. Todd [1909] i K. B. 165 78 L. J. K. B. 145 ; 100 L. T. 99 ; 73 461 J. P. 73 ; 25 T. L. R. 103 Mumford v. Stohwasser (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 556 ; 43 L. J. Ch. 694 30 L. T. 859 22 W. R. 833 757 Mundy's and Roper's Contract [1899] i Ch. 275 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 135 ; 79 L. T. 583 ; 47 W., R. 226 C. A 882,883 Munro v. Munro (1840) 7 CI. & F. 842 1206 Munster v. Lamb (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 588 ; 52 L. J. Q. B. 726 ; 49 L. T. 252 W. R. 248 ; 47 J. P. 805 32 512 Murphy v. Ford (1855) 5 Ir. C. L. R. 19 647 Murphy 0. Glass (1869) L. R. 2 P. C. 408 ; 6 Moore, P. C. (N. S.) i ; 20 L. T, 461 17 W. R. 592 2g6 Murray v. East India Co. (1821) 5 B. & Aid. 204 24 R. R. 325 . . 1348 Murray v. Hall (1849) 7 C. B. 441 ; 18 L. J. C. P. 161 ; 13 Jur. 262 387, 389 Murray v. Mann (1848) 2 Exch. 538 ; 17 L. J. Ex. 256 ; 12 Jur. 634 234 Murray 0. Watkins (1890) 62 L. T. 796 77 Murthwaite o. Jenkinson (1824) 2 B. & C. 357 ; 3 B. & C. 191 ; 3 D. & R. 764 26 R. R. 384 580 Muschamp e. OLancs. & Preston Junction Ry. (1841) 8 M. & W. 421 2 Railw, Cas. 607 ; 5 Jur. 656 250
(Earl of)
;
.
.411
;
....
; . . . . . ; .
.
.191
......
. ; ; . ; ; ;
......
.
,
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
.
clxxi
PAGE Musgrave v. Brooke (1884) 26 Ch. D. 792 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 102 ; 33 W. R. 211 655 Musgraveo. Cave (1741) Willes, 319 675,678,679 Musgrave o. Pulido (1879) L. R. 5 App. Cas. 102 (J. C.) ; 49 L. J. P. C. 20 28 W. R. 373 P. C 41 L. T. 629 341 Musgrove v. Chun Teeong Toy [1891] A. C. 272 ; 60 L. J. P. C. 28 ; 64 L. T,
;
378
340
Musgrove v. Newell (1836) i M. & W. 582 ; 2 Gale, 91 ; i Tyr. & Gr. 957 5L. J. Ex.227 49j493 Musgrove v. Pandelis [1919] 2 K. B. 43 88 L. J. K. B. 915 120 L. T. 601 ;
; ;
35 T. L. R. 299 C. Musurus Bey o. Gadban [1894] i Q. B. 533 ; affirmed 2 Q. B. 352 ; 63 L. J Q. B. 621 ; 9R. 519; 71 L. T. 51 ; 42W. R. 545 C. A. . Mutton V. Hornsey D. C. (1899) Times, April 12 . Mutzenbecher v. La Aseguradora Espanola [1906] i K. B. 254 ; 75 L. J K. B. 172; 94 L. T. 127; 54 W. R. 207
406
.341
.
534
......
J.
240
1403
Q. B. 357
83 L. T. 633.
929
Napier v. Napier [1915] P. 184 ; 84 L. J. P. 177 ; 113 L. T. 764 59 Sol. Jo. 560; 31 T. L. R. 472 C. A Napier o. Williams [191 1] i Ch. 361 80 L. J. Ch. 298 104 L. T. 380 ; 55
;
1092 Ch. i 101 L. T. 837 ; 26 T. L. R. 57 79 L. J. Ch. i C' A. 1278 661, 75 54 Sol. Jo. 48 Nash V. Armstrong (1861) lo C. B. N. S. 259 30 L. J. C. P. 286 ; 7 Jur, (N. S.) 1060; 9 W. R. 782 J45 Nash V. Derby (Earl of) (1705) 2 Vern. 537 592 Nash o. Hodgson (1855) 6 De G. M. & G. 474 3 Eq. R. 1025 ; 25 L. J. Ch, 186 I Jur. (N. S.) 946 "3 Nash V. Inman [1908] 2 K. B. i 77 L. J. K, B. 626 98 L. T. 658 24 T. L. R. 401 22 52 Sol. Jq. 335 C. a. Nash V. Preston (1630) Cro. Car. 190 609 66 L. J. Ch. 222 76 L. T. 1 National Bank of Wales, Re [1897] i Ch. 21005 45 W. R. 401 National Exchange Co. -a. Drew (1855) 2 Macq 145 543 National Manure Co. /. Donald (1859) 4 H. & N. 8 28 L. J. Ex. 185 W. R. 185 851 National Mercantile Bank v. Rymill (i88t) 44 L. T. 767 C. A 415 National Phonograph Co. v. Edison-Bell Co. [1908] i Ch. 335 yy L. J. Ch, 218; 98L. T./291; 24T. L. R. 201 429,479 National Phonograph Co. a. Menck [191 1] A. C. 336 80 L. J. P. C. 105 104 L. T. 5 27 T. L. R. 239 ; 28 R. P. C. 229 48 Sc. L. R. 733 927 Natt, Re {1888) 37 Ch. D. 517 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 797 58 L. T. 722 ; 36 W. R.
Sol. Jo.
....
; ;
.
....
;
177
548
Naylor 0. Arnitt (1830) I Russ. & M. 501 1127 Neale v. Electric Ordnance Co. [1906] 2 K. B. 558 75 L. J. K. B. 974 ; 95 L. T. 592 ; 22 T. L. R. 732 452 Nealec. RatclifI(i85o) 15 Q. B. 916; 20L. J. Q. B. 130^ 15 Jur. 166 135 319 Neate o. Harding (1851) 6 Exch. 349; 20 L. J. Ex. 250 1254 Neate v. Pickard (1843) 2 Notes of Cases, 406 Neaverson v. Peterborough Council [1902] i Ch. 557 71 L. J. Ch. 378 ; 86 66 J. P. 404 50 W. R. 549 18 T. L. R. 360 C. A. L. T. 738 394, 851 Negus . Forster (1882) 46 L. T. 675 30 W. R. 671 C. A. 57 684, NeiU o. Devonshire (Duke of) (1882) L. R. 8 App. Cas. 135 ; 31 W. R. 622. 685,813
;
......
; ;
1307
....
...
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxii
TABLE OF CASES
>
PAGE
. Neilson v. Betts (1871) L. R. 5 H. L. i ; 40 L. J. Ch. 317 ; 19 W. R. 1121 378 Nelson's Case (1585) 3 Leon. 128 673 Nelson v. Liverpool Brewery Co. (1877) L. R. 2 C. P. 31 1 ; 46 L. J. C. P. 675 ; 25 W. R. 877 397, 404 Nelthorpe v. Famngton (1674) 2 Lev. 113 349 Nepean 0. Budden (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 626 55 Nerot V. Wallace (1789) 3 T. R. 17. 95 Nevil's (Sir Henry) Case (1570) Plowd. 377 676, 722, 743 Nevil's Case (1604) 7 Rep. 33 a, 33 b 671.743 Nevill o. Fine Art Co. [1897] A. C. 68 ; 66 L. J Q. 195 ; 75 L. T. 606 ; 61
.J.P-5
Neville
'
v,
;
282
501, 508, 510 [1919] A. C. 368 ; 88 L. J. K. B. . 496, 63 Sol. Jo. 213 35 T. L.. R. 167 H. L. (E.)
;
Nevin, iJfi[i89i]2Ch. 299 60L. J. Ch. 542; 65 L. T. 35 C.A.. New, Re [1901] 2 Ch. 534 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 710 85 L. T. 174 50 W. R.
; . ; ;
497 1228,1229
17
1 1
C.
12
Newbegin o. Bell (1857) 23 Beav. 386 Newbery, Re (1866) L. R. i Ch. App. 263
35 L. J. Ch. 330 ; 13 L. T. 781 ; ; 12 Jur. (N. S.) 154; 14W. R. 360 Newbiggingo. Adam (1886) 34Ch. D. 582 C. C. A.. Newhould, JfJe(i9i4) no L. T. Newby o. Wiltshire (1785) 4 Dougl. 284 ; Cald. 527 2 Esp. 739 ; 3 Bos. & P.
.......
A
. ; ;
1391
....
; ;
1228
38
1357
208 247 5 R. R. 772 21 L. T. Newcastle (Duke of), Re (1869) L. R. 8 Eq. 700 39 L. J. Ch. 68 18 W. R. 8 343 Newcastle (Duke of) . Worksop [1902] 2 Ch. 145 71 L. J. Ch. 487; 86 L. T. 405 18 T. L. R. 472 693, 694 Newcomb v. Bonham (i68i) i Vern. 7 2 Vent. 364 ; 2 Freem. Ch. 67 815 P. 767 Ch. 297 L. J. Ch. 763 L. T. 653 NeWen, Re [1894] 2 63 58 J. 70 8 R. 309 43 W. R. 58 754 Newfoundland Govt. v. Newfoundland Ry. (1888) 13 App. Cas. 199; 57 L. J. P. C. 35; 58L.T. 285 P. C.: 143,1049 New Land Development Association & Gray [1892] 2 Ch. 138 61 L. J. Ch. 28 66 L. T. 4P4 ; 40 W. R. 295 323 Newman, i?e (1876) 3 Ch. D. 494 C. A. 367 Newman 0. Barton (1690) 2 Vern. 2P5 1269 Newman v. Newman (1760) 2 Wils. 125 558 Newman v. ZJachary (1670) Alcyn, 3 428 New Monckton Collieries 0. Keeling [191 1] A. C. 648 80 L. J. K. B. 1205 105 L. T. 337 27 T. L. R. 551 H. L. (E.) 462 55 Sol. Jo. 687 Newport (Mayor ol) v. Saunders (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 411 i L. J. K. B. 147. 324 New, Prance & Co.'s Trustee v. Hunting [1897] i Q. B. 607 1067 Newry and Enniskillen Ry. 0. Coombe (1849) 3 Exch. 565 18 L. J. Ex. 5 Railw. Cas. 633 981 325 New Sharlston Co. v. Westmorland (1900) 82 L. T. 725 New South Wales (Bank of) v. Owston (1879) L. R. 4 App. Cas. 270 (P. C.) 48 L. J. P. C. 25 40 L. T. 500 ; 14 Cox C. C. 267 P. C. 353 Newr South Wales Taxation Commrs. v. Palmer [1907] A. C. 179 76 L. J. P. C. 41 ; 96 L. T. 278 T. L. R. 304 . 14 Manson, 106. 23 1377 Newstead v. Searles (1737) i Atk. 265 104 Newton, Re [1896] i Ch. 740 65 L. J. Ch. 641 73 L. T. 692 44 W. R. 470C. A. 1229 Newton v. Anglo-Australian Invest. Co. [1895] A. C. 244 64 L. J. P. C. 57 ; II R. ^%i 2 Mans. "2^6 1008 72 L. T. 305 43 W. R. 401
; ;
.863
.
.........
.
.
...
. . ;
.781
.
.......
;
.
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Newton
v.
ckxiii
PAGE
Cubitt (1862) 12 C. B. N. S. 32
31 L. J. C. P. 246
6 L. T. 860
695,
696
Newton v. Harland
6 D. P. C. 630
Newton
588
v.
;
Newton
17
A.-G. [1899] A. C. 62 68 L. J. Q. B. 135 79 L. T. 568; 63J. P. 179; 48W. R. 32; 15T. L. R. 93 .1343 New Zealand and Australian Land Co. v. Watson (1881) 7 Q. B. D. 374 50 L. J. Q. B. 433 ; 44 L. T. 675 29 W. R. 694 231 Niboyet v. Niboyet (1878) 4 P. D. i 48 L. J. P. i 27 W. R. 39 L. T. 486 203C. A. 1204 NichoUc. McKaeg (1830) 10 B. & C. 721 644 NichoUs V. Bastard (1835) 2 C. M. & R. 659 i Tyr. & G. 156 i Gale, 295 S L. J. Ex. 7 417 Nichols, Ex pane (1883) 22 Ch. D. 782 52 L. J. Ch. 635 48 L. T. 492 31 W. R. 661C. A 1050 Nichols V. Marsland (1875) L. R. 10 Ex. 255 44 L. J. Ex. 134; 23 W. R. 693 33 L. T. 265 ; (1876) 2 Ex. D. I 46 L. J. Ex. 174 ; 35 L. T. 725 25 W. R. 173 C. 361, 406, 453 Nicholson, Re [1909] 2 Ch. iii 100 L. T. 877 ii2i 78 L. J. Ch. 516 Nicholson v. Chapman (1793) 2 H. Bl. 254 3 R. R. 374 205, 964 Nickoll & Knight v. Ashton, Edridge & Co. [1901] 2 K. B. 126 70 L. J. K. B. 600 ; 84 L. T. 804 49 W. R. 513 6 Com. Cas. 151 ; 17 T. L. R. 467 ; 130 9 Asp. M. L. C. 209 C. A NicoU . Greaves (1864) 33 L. J. C. P. 259 10 Jur. 17 C. B. N. S. 27 (N. S.)9i9; loL. T. 531 ; 12 W. R. 961 212 Nield V. L. & N. W. Ry. (1874) L. R. 10 Ex. 4 23 W. R. 44 L. J. Ex. 15 60 772 Nightingale, Re [1909] i Ch. 385 ; 106 L. T. 292 T 1286 Nightingale o. Lawson (1785) i Bro. C. C. 440. 596 Nightingale o. Quartley (1787) i T. R. 630 1094 Nightingale o. Reynolds [1903] 2 Ch. 236 88 L. T. 654 72 L. J. Ch. 564 52W. R. I C. A 837 Nisbet's and Potts' Contract [1906] i Ch. 386 75 L. J. Ch. 238 ; 94 L. T. . 297 54 W. R. 286 22 T. L. R. 234 C. A. 759, 766, 767, 804 Nixon, iJe [1904] I Ch. 638 73 L. J. Ch. 446 1366 Noakes v. Rice [1902] A. C. 24 71 L. J. Ch. 139 86 L. T. 62 ; 66 J. P. J47 ; 18 T. L. R. 196 831 50 W. R. 305 Nobel's Explosives Co. o. Anderson (1894) II R. P. C. 115 1017 Nobel's Explosives Co. v. Jones (1881) 17 Ch. D. 721 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 582 44 L. T. 593 ; 30 W. R. 294 C. A. ; affirmed L. R. 8 App. Cas. 5 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 339; 48 L. T. 490; 31 W. R. 388 1017 Noble o. Brett (1858) 24 Beav. 499 ; 27 L. J. Ch. 516 4 Jur. (N. S.) 623 6 W. R. 219 1409 Noden v. Johnson (1850) 20 L. J. Q. B. 95 16 Q. B. 218 15 Jur. 424 437 Noel V. Redruth Foundry Co. [1896] i Q. B. 453 65 L. J. Q. B. 330 74 L. T. 196 ; 44 W. R. 407 451 1269 Noell V. Robinson (1682) i Vern. 90 ; 2 Rep. Ch. 248 Nordenstrom v. Pitt (1845) 14 L. J. Ex. 150 ; 13 M. & W. 723 ; 2 Dowl. & 116 L. P. C. 672
u.
; ; . . ; ; ;
;
New York
(1840) i M. & Gr. 644 ; 4 Bing. (N. C.) 406 ; 6 Scott, 186 ; I Scott (N. R.) ; . 473 ; 2 Jur. 350 ; 9 D. P. C. 65 . (1868) L. R. 4 Ch. App. 143 ; 38 L. J. Ch. 145 ; 19 L. T.
383
7G0
....
36 L. T. 788
;
Norfolk (Duke
of) .
Browne
Norman o. Baldry (1834) 6 Sim. 621 Norman v. Villars (1877) 2 Ex. D. 359 W. R. 780
813 1420
46 L.
,
J.
Ex. 579
25
1196
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxiv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
;
Norrington, Re (1879) '3 ^h. D. 654 ; 44 J. P. 474 28 W. R. 711C. A. Norris V. Baker (1616) i RoUe, 393 ; 3 Bulst. 196 ; J. Bridg. 47 Norris v. Chambers (1861) 3 D. F. c& J. 584 29 Beav. 246 36 L. J. Ch. 285 9 W. R. 794 7 Jur. (N. S.) 689 4 L- T. 345 Norris 0. Seed (1849) 3 Exch. 782 ; 18 L. J. Ex. 300 13 Jur. 830 North, Re [1895] 2 Q. B. 264 ; 64 L. J. Q. B. 694 ; 72 L. T. 854 59 J. P,
; ; ; ; ; ;
1408
477
339 473
71
724
North North
v.
G. N. Ry. (i860) 2
.
Giflf.
64
29 L. J. Ch. 301
L. T. 510
6 Jur.
(N. S.)244
o.
929
J.
Wakefield (1849) 18 L.
'
731
Northam
(1855) 11 Exch. 70 ; 24 L. J. Ex. 237 Northampton's Case (1613) 12 Rep. 134; Moor. 821 Northan v. Hurley (1853) i E. & B. 665 ; 22 L. J. Q. B. 183 ; 17 Jur. 672 North British Insurance Co. v. Lloyd (1854) 10 Exch. 523 ; 3 C. L. R. 264 24 L. J. Ex. 14 ; I Jur. (N. S.) 45 Northen v. Carnegie (1859) 4 Drew. 587 ; 28 L. J. Ch. 930 ; 9 W. R. 481
v.
Bowden
Northern Bank v. McMamn [1909] i Ir. R. 374 Northern Counties Insurance Co. o. Whipp (1884) 26 Ch. D. 482 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 629 51 L. T. 806 32 W., R. 626 C. A Northumberland (Duke of) o. Houghton (1870) L. R. 5 Exch. 127 ; 39 L. J. Ex. 66 22 L. T. 49 ; 18 W. R. 495 Northumberland (Duke of) v. Tynemouth [1909] 2 K. B. 374 ; 78 L. J. K, B 767 100 L. T. 930 ; 73 J. P. 326 North Western Bank 11. Poynter [1895] A. C. 56 11 R. 73 ; 22 Ct. of Sess
i ; ; ; ;
683
59
Cas.
959
V.
N.
W. Ry.
McMichael (1850)
1]
Exch. 114; 20 L.
;
J.
Ex. 97;
;
15 Jur.
2 Ch. 27
80 L. J. Ch. 119
;
103 L. T. 821 69
;
Norton
c.
EUam
433
Norton c. Freeker. (1737) I Atk. 523 Norton v. Jason (1,653) Style, 398 Norton . Seton (1819) 3 Phlll. 147 Norwood's and Blake's Contract [1917] i Ir. R. 472. Nottidge o. Dering [1909] 2 Ch. 647 loiL. T. 491. Nottingham (Mayor of) . Lambert (1738) Willes, Nottingham Corporation, Re [1897] 2 Q. B. 502 66 L.
. . . . . . . ; ;
(1837) 2 M.
& W. 461
M.
....... ...
. .
& H.
"5
580 465
m
J.
:
.1177
1406 866 682
Q. B. 883
77 L. T.
61 J. P. 725 Hill, The (1884) 9 P. D. 105 ; 32 W. R. 764 C. A. 51 L. T. 66; s Asp. M. L. C. 241 Nowellc. Hicks (1601) cited Co. Litt. 114 b
;
210 Notting
..... ......
53 L. J. P. 56
"
986
329,369
852 212 1406
Gale, 72;
Nugent o. Gifford (1738) i Atk. 463 Nugent V. Smith (1876) i C. P. D. 423 W.R.'ii7 Nutbrown o. Thornton (1804) 10 Ves.
Nuttall
o.
. .
45 L.
161
J. C. P.
697
34 L. T. 827
. .
.
25
249, 250
.125
Hargreaves [1892] i Ch. 23 ; 61 L. J. Ch, 94; 65L. T. 597 40 W. R. 200 C. A. 1018 Nutter 0. Holland [1894] 3 Ch. 408 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 932 ; 71 L. T. 508 43 W. R. i8 i 7 R. 491C. A. 1113 Nyberg 0. Handelaar'[i892] 2 Q. B. 202; 61 L. J Q. B. 709 67 L. T. 361 ; 40 W. R. 545 56 J. P. 694 C. A. 418, 423
5 ; ; ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Oakden
v.
;
ckxv
PAGE
Pike (1865) 34 L. J. Ch. 620 ; 11 Jur. (N. S.) 666 12 L. T. 527 ; 13 W. R. 673 49 Oakes v. Turquand (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. C. 325 ; 36 L. J. Ch. 949 ; 16 L. T. 808 ; 15 W. R. 1201 34 Oakes v. Wood (1837) 2 M. & W. 791 ; Murph. & H. 237 ; 6 L. J. Ex. 200 436 Oatway, Re [1903] 2 Ch. 356 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 575 ; 88 L. T. 622 1142, 1143 O'Brien v. Clement (1846) 16 M. & W. 159 ; 4 Dow. & L. 563 ; 16 L. J. Ex. 76 525 O'Brien v. O'Brien (1751) i Ambl. 107 789, 792 Ocean Accident Co. v. Ilford Gas Co. [1905] 2 K. B. 493 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 799 21 T. L. R. 610 C. A 384, 612 93 L. T. 381 Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. v. Sutherberry (1880) 16 Ch. D. 236; 50 L. J. Ch. 308 141 43 L. T. 743 ; 45 J. P. 238 29 W. R. 1 13 C. A. Oddy, Re [1906] i Ch. 93 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 141 ; 94 L. T. 146 ; 54 W. R. 291 1 144 Oddy, Re [191 1] i Ch. 532 ; 80 L. J. Ch. 404 ; 104 L. T. 338 27 T. L. R. Sol. To. 348 1123 312; 55 Odihamc. Smith (1593) Cro. Eliz. 589 551 O'Driscoll V. Manchester Insurance Committee [1915] i K. B. 811 84 L. J. K. B. 734; 112 L. T. 594; 59 Sol. Jo. 235 ; 31 T. L. R. 103 ,
. .
.
......
; ;
affirmed [1915] 3 K. B. 499 ; 85 L. J. K. B. 83 ; 79 J. P. 553 ; 113 L. T. 683 ; 31 T. L. R. 532 C. 1055 Offley . Best (1668) I Sid. 370 1350 Offord I/. Davies (1862) 12 C. B. N. S. 748; 31 L. J. C. P. 319; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 22 ; 6 L. T. 579 ; 10 W. R. 758 88, 293 Ofner, Re [1909] i Ch. 60 ; 78 L. J. Ch. 50 ; 99 L. T. 813C. A. . . 1331 Ogden o. Ogden [1908] P. 46 ; 77 L. J. P. 34 ; 97 L. T. 827 ; 24 T. L. R.
94
C. A.
1204
. 17 R. R. 13 O'Gorman v. O'Gorman [1903] 2 Ir. Rep. (K. B. D.) 573 O'Grady, Re [1915] i Ch. 613 ; 84 L. J. Ch. 496 ; 112 L. T. 615
Ogilvie
V.
Foljambe (1817)
3 Mer. 53
loi, 186
358, 360
59
Sol. Jo.
C. 231
456
32 T. L. R. 456
I
....
85 L. J. Ch. 386
1357
114 L. T. 1097
;
1352,1361,1371,1373
1287 644 1007
124
95
Ves. Sen. 135 Oland's Case (1602) 5 Rep. 116 b . . Olathe Silver Mining Co., Re (1884) 27 Ch. D. 278 ; 33 W. R. 12 Oldershaw o. Holt (1840) 4 P. & D. 307 ; 12 A. & E. 590 ; i A. & H. i ; 11 L. J. Q. B. 221 ; 4 Jur. 1012 Oldershaw v. King (1857) 27 L. J. Ex. :20 ; 2 H. & N. 577 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.)
1152;
5W.
R. 753
827 Stringer (1885) 51 L. T. 895 Oliver's Settlement, Re [1905] i Ch. 191 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 62 ; 53 W. R. 215 ; 21 T. L. R. 61 754. 1278 . . .1121 Oliver, i2e [1908] 2 Ch. 74 ; 77 L. J. Ch. 547 ; 99 L. T. 241 Oliver v. Hinton [1899] 2 Ch. 264 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 583 ; 81 L. T. 212 ; 48 W. R. 3 ; 15 T. L. R. 450C. 759 Oilier V. Oilier [1914] P. 240 ; 84 L. J. P. 23 ; in L. T. 697 ; 58 Sol. Jo.
Oldham
v.
754C. A
1202
1405,1416 O'Neillf. McGrorty [1915] I Ir. R. I Onions v. Tyrer (1716) i P. Wms. 343 ; 2 Vern. 742 ; Pre. Ch. 149 ; Gilb. 1250 Eq. R. 130 13^5 Onslow o. Corrie(i8i7) 2 Madd. 330 1284 . . . Onslow V. Mitchell (1812) 18 Ves. 490 ; 11 R. R. 240 811 Onward Building Society v. Smithson [1893] 1 Ch. i ; 41 W. R. S3C. A. . 260, 964 Oppenheim v. Russell (1802) 3 Bos. & P. 42 ; 6 R. R. 604
. . .
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxvl
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
u.
;
Oppenheim
40 L.
J.
25 L. T. 93 245 Frazer [1907] 2 K. B. 50 ; 76 L. J. K. B. 806 ; 97 L. T. 3 ; 420 23 T. L. R. 410 ; 12 Com. Cas. 280 C. A Orby 0. Trigg (1722) 9 Mod. 2 831 Orchard v. Bush & Co. [1898] 2 Q. B. 284 ; 67 L. J. Q. B. 650 ; 78 L. T. 46 W. R. 527 244, 245 557 . 1262 Ord, Re (1879) '2 Ch. D. 22 J 41 L. T. 13 ; affirming 26 W. R. 880 . 1216 Ord w. Blackett (1725) 9 Mod. 116 Oriental Bank, Re (1884) 28 Ch. D. 643 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 327 ; 52 L. T. 170 60, 1389 Original Hartlepool Co. v. Gibb (1877) 5 Ch. D. 713 ; 46 L. J. Ch. 311 ; 36 L. T. 433; 3Asp. M. C. 411 394 Ormeo. Orme (1824) 2 Add. 382 1179 Ormerod's Case (1867) L. R. 5 Eq. no ; 37 L. J. Ch. iii ; 16 W. R. 240 . 1014 Ormerod v. Todmorden Joint Stock Mill (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 155 ; 52 L. J. . . . Q. B. 445 ; 47 J. P. 532 ; 31 W. R. 759-C. A. 402, 678 Ormonde (Marquis) v. Kynnersley (1820) 5 Madd. 369 786 Orsmond, Re (1887) 58 L. T. 24 1379 Orton V. Butler (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 652 414 Osborne. Gillett (1873) L. R. 8 Exch. 88 ; 42 L. J. Ex. 53 ; 28 L. T. 197 : 21
C. P. 231
Oppenheimer
.......
i
....
;
.
W.
Osborne
R. 409
o.
477
[1911]
Amalgamated Society
;
Ch. 540
. 6 L. T. 267 27 T. L. R. 289 Osborne 0. Bradley [1903] 2 Ch. 446 73 L. J. Ch. 49 89L. T. 11 . 805 Osborne v. Chocqueel [1896] 2 Q. B. 109 65 L. J. Q. B. 534 ; 74 L. T. 786 44 W. R. 575 359, 360, 453 Osbourn o. Rider (1606) Cro. Jac. 133 614 Osgood V. Sunderland (1914) in L. T. 529 ; 30 T. L. R. 530, 76 Ossulston's (Lord) Case (1708) 3 Salk. 336 562 O'SuUivan v. Thomas [1895]' i Q. B. 698 64 L. J. Q. B. 398 ; 72 L. T. jio, 321 285 43 W. R. 269 59 J. P. 134 Otlery Monastery Case (1583) I Leon. 4 592 Otter V. Vaux (Lord) (1856) 2 K. & J. 650 affirmed 6 De G. M. & G. 638 ; 26L. J. Ch. 128; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 169; 5W. R. 188 830 Otway o. Hudson (1706) 2 Vern. 584 752 Otway V. Otway (1888) 13 P. D. 141 57 L. J. P. 81 59 L. T. 153 C. A. 1194 Oughton . Seppings (183b) i B. & Ad. 241 8 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. 394 1346 Ovey, Re (1885) 29 Ch. D. 560 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 752 52 L. T. 849 33 W. R.
; ; .
80 L. J. Ch. 315 ^
104
...
.
....
.
...
. . ;
<
821*.
1112
[1900] 2 Ch. 524
;
Ovey
V.
Ovey
69 L. J. Ch. 804
L. J. Ch. 248
J.
;
49
W.
R. 45
.
83 L. T.
311
1116
27 W. R. 305
;
583
Ch. 749
;
71 L. T. 181
43
;
W.
2
R. 55
Owen &
8 R. 566 Co. o.
837
Cronk [1895]
Q. B. 265
64 L.
J.
Q. B. 288
Manson,
Owen
' " 234 20 L. J. Ch. 314 ; 15 Jur. 339 (1851) 3 Mac. & G. 378 affirmed (1853) 4 H. L. C. 997 ; 17 Jur. 861 ; i Eq. R. 370 149, 152, 299 Owen V. Lewyn (1672) i Ventr. 223 420
"5
V.
Homan
Owen Owen
. .
....... ........
; .
3 L. J.
Owston
In
10
the
&
.101
1349
6 L. T. 368
W. R. 410
1258
Oxenham
v.
Clapp (1831) 2 B.
&
Ad. 309
1344, 1345,
1379
TABLE OF CA8ES
.
clxxvii
PAGE
Oxford's (Bishop of) Case (1621) Palm. 174 -'^yiS Oxley, Re [1914] i Ch. 604. ; 83 L. iio.L. T. 626 58 Sol. Jo. J. Ch, 442 .11405,1417 319; 30 T. L. R. 327 C. A Oxley V. Wilkes [1898] 2 Q. B. 56 ; 67 L. 520 J. Q. B. 678 ; 78 L. T. 728
. . . . ; ;
'.
'
Packington's Case (1744) 3 Atk. 215 Padget o. Priest (1787) 2 T. R. 97 i R. R. 440 Padmorea. L,awfence (1840) ii A. &E. 380 3 Per.
; ;
'.
792 1343,1345
-
& Dav.
. .
209
9 Li J. Q. B.
. .
'.-'.
527
Page V. Hayward (1704) 2 Salk. 570 . . 561 Page !). Leapingwell (1812) 18 Ves. 463 ; iiR. R. 234 .'1103 Page V. Newmaa (1829) 4 M. & Ry. 305 B: & C. 378,; 7 L. J. (0. S.) ' K. B. 267 116 Paget's Case (1593) 5 Rep. 76 b .'1 / (iif. 786 ", .->'A.Paget 0. Huish (1863) I H. & M. 663 1267 Paine, In re ; Read, Ex parte [1897] i Q. B. 122 66 L. J. Q. B. 71 75 L. T. . 316; 45 W. R. 190 3 Mailson, 309
. ;
. . -
.301
. .
i'j;-. Paine z". Partrich (1690) Carth. 19I '. . ..lo.". Palmer's and Thprpe's Case (1583) 4 Repi 20 Palmer, Re [1893] 3 Ch. 369 62 L. J. Ch. 988 ; 69 L. T. 477 42 W. R. '-y^i. 151; 2 R. 619 C. A. Palmer v. Caledonian Ry. [1892] i Q. B. 823 61 L. J. Q. B. 552 ; 66 L. T. '" 40 W. R. 562 771 Palmer 0. Danby (1701) I Eq. Ca. Ab. 261 .. Palmer v. Day [1895] 2 Q. B. 6l8.>, 64 L. J. Q. B. 807 ; 44 W. R. 14 2 Manson, 386 . .
.
.
696 503
1267
'8
....;.'
.
1231
Palmer Palmer
o. I Ch. 758 ; 80 L. J. Gh. 418 T. L. R. 320 ; 55 Sol. Jo, 365 . : Palmer 0. Fleshees (1663) i Sid. 167
poug;i86
n.
Palmer H. Palmer
205
v.
...... .......
, ,
.
'
239 627
1118 713
'If'
1
104L. T. 557; 27
.
''
& W.
749
7 D. P. C. 232
& H.
0.
256
1092 69
'.
...
;
45
W.
;
R.yii
.
Palmer
v.
Snow
i
Q. B. 725 6g L. J. Q. B. 356 ; 82 L. T. 199 64 J. P. 342 (1870) L. R. 5 Ch. 318 39 L. J. Ch. 482 ; 22 L. T. 424
[1900]
i
; ;
.
48
18
.
'<
Pankhursto. Howell (1870) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 136; 19 W. R. 312 Paradine II. Jane (1647) Aleyn, 26 Styl. 47 .. Parfitt V. Chambre (1872) 42 L. J. Ch. 6 L. R. 15 Eq. 36 27 L. T. 750
;
.
'
!'""
;
21
W.
R. 50
.138
657,661
;
Hember
;
'
41 L. J. P. 68
.
27 L. T. 215
W. R. 200
-35,
,
1258, 1259
8 De G. M. & G. 5 Pariente . Lubbock (185.5) 20 Beavi 588 Paris V. Levy (i860) 9 C. B. N. S. 342 30 L. J. C. P. 11 7 Jur. (N. S.) 289 :. . 9 W. R. 71 3 L. T. 323 Parker, In the Goods oj (i860) i Sw. & Tr. 523 31 L. J. P. 8 6 Jur. (N. S.)
:
.231
;
''
5z6
1288
'-'I
354
Parker's Trusts,
Re
58 L. J.Ch. 23
60 L. T. 83
37
.
W. R. 313 C.
Parker,
.
.
A
. ,.
//
1413
Re [1901] i Ch. 408; 70 L. J. Ch. 170; 84 L. T. iiS; 49 W. R. -..-'no 7yi27 .,.).'.' . . 215 ''>' 5*6 Parker v. Combleford (1599) Cro. Eliz. 725
. '
c.i.
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxyiii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
52 L. J: P. 95 ;v .10.,.
; ;
'.
.^f..
....
;3v\
: ,1.
621 i Salk. 262 a6 Jons [rio|| 2 K. B. 32 79 L. J. K. B. 921 ; 102 L. T. 685 627, 801 T. L. R. 453 i Salk. 12 Mod. Rep. 466 Holt JParkerp. Kett(i702) I Ld. Raym. 658 95 a. a Com. 84 1345 (K. B.) 221 ;i Parker . McKemna (1874) L. R. lo Ch. 96 44 L. J. Ch. 425 31 L. T. 739 232 23 W. R. 271 f' ihinK1376 P^rker.i). Ringham (1864) 33 Beav. 535 Parker 0. Thomas .(1842) 3 Man. & G. 815 587 Parkes v. Prescptt (1-869)1, R. 4 Ex. H6g ;, 38 L; J. Ex. 105 20 L. T. 537 17 : W. R. 773' 505. 506 .1112 Parkes v. Royal Botanic Society (1908) 24 T. L. R. 50S Park Gate Waggon Works Co., Re (1881) 17 Ch. D. 234 44 L. T. 901 ; 30
Parker Parker
11.
iHarris (1692)
...
; ;
47
J. P.
.
808
. .
32
'
W. R:
1^^'.
. .
'<'
1256
0.
'
.' 20d-A. .1.1 .l.dd.;;'i ,U ,<,! jJt"[1892] 3 Ch. 510 ; 62 L. J. Ch.ijf ;, 67 L. T. 77 ; 41 W. R. 120 . Parkino. Radcliffe (1798) I Bos. &.P. 282; 4 R. R. 797 ;Parkiao. Thorold (1852) 16 Beav. 59 ; 2 Sim. (N. S.) i ; 22 L. J. Ch. 170 ; -.. J :..<*'.: i . . . . .J 16 Jur. 959 Parkins 0. Scott (1.862) i H. & C. 153 ; 31 L. J. Ex. 331 ; 8 Jur. (N. S.) 593 .' . . . 6L. T. 394.;' 10 W. R. 562 i. ;Parkinson *. Potter (1885) 16 Q. B. D. 152 ; 55 L. J. Q. B. 153 ; 51 L. T.
W.iR.
.365
.
Parkin,
Re
1246 586
148
'
-'
..
'
507
341 8i8; 34W. R. 215.; 50 J. P. 470 Parlement.Belge,a?he((i88o);5 P. D. 197'; 42 L. T. 273 38 W. R. 642 ; 4 Asp. M. C. 234 C..A ,r. 341 626 Parmenter v. Webber (1818) 8 Taunt. 593 ; 2 Moore, 656 20 R. R. 575 . . Parnaby v. Lancaster Canal' Co. (1839) 11 A. & E. 223 332 Parr v. Winteringham (1859) i E. & E. 394; 28 L. J. Q. B. 123 ; 5 L. T. . 320 361 ; S Jur. (N. S.) 787 ;. 7 W. R. 288 Parrett Navigation .(Stpwer(i84o) 6 M.' & W. 564 ; 8 Dow.. 405 ; 9 L. J. Ex. 180 J , 534 Parry.o; Great Ship Co. (1863) 4 B. & S. 556 ; 33 L. J. Q. B. 41 ; 10 Juf. " (N. S.) 294 9 L. T. 379 ; 12 W. R. 78 105 ,1 / Parry 11. Sitiith (1879) 4 C. P. D. 325 ; 48 L. J: C. P. 731 ; '41 L. T. 93 ; 27 W. R.,8oi 333 Parsons 0. Lanoe (1748) I Ves. Sen. 189 1240 Parsons 0. Loyd (1772)3 Wils. 341 531 . Parsons . Parsons (1869) L. R. 8 Eq. 260 17W. R. 1005 1355 ' Partridge ..Bere.(;i822) 642 5 B..& Aid. 604 ; i D. & R. 272 ; 24 R. R. 487 Partridgaii. Partridge [1894] i Ch. 351 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 122 ; 70 L. T. 261 901 'Pasley v. Freeman (1789) 3 T. R. 51 536, 537, 538, 540 Pasmore v. Oswaldtwistle, &c., Council [1898] A. C. 387 67 L. J. Q. B. 635 ". . 328 78 L. T: 569 ; 62 J. P. 628 H. L. (E.) Pater v. Baker (1847) 3. C. B. 831 ; 16 L. J. C. P. 124 ; 11 Jur. 370 . 406 Paterson . Scott (1852) i De .G. M. & G. 531 ; 21 L. J. Ch. 346 ; 16 Jur. i .1 898 C. A. . . 1399 Patrick, Re [1891] i Ch. 82 ; 60 L. J. Ch. 1 1 1 ; 63 L. T. 752 ; 39 W. R. 1 13 II, ./,,'.. C. A. . . . . 1051 Patrick . Colerick (1838) 3 M. & W. 483 ; 7 L. J. Ex. 135 . 82, 386 Patrick v. Mihier (1877) 2 C. P. D. 342 ; 46 L. J. C. P. 537 ; 36 L. T.-738 ; / 25 W. R. 790 49 Patscheider v- G; W. Rf. (.iSfS) 3 Ex. D. 1 53 ; 38 L. T. 149 ; 26 W. R. 268 . 25 -Patterson's Estate, Re (.i864).4 De G. J. & S. 422 ; 23 L. J. Ch. 596 ; 10 L. T. '. 801; 12W. R. 941 C. A. . . . . 1291 h'.,
,'.,
.*'
. . . ; ;
'
.').'.
.......
. . . ; . . . ; . . . . .
.
,..." * ....
"^
,'
'
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Pattinson o. Luckley (1875) 44 L. J. Ex. 180 ; L. R. 10 Ex. 330 360 ; 24 W. R. 224 Pattison v. Jones (1828) 8 B. & C. 578 ; 3 Man. & Ry. loi ; 7 L. K. B. 26 Paul 0. Moodie (1620) 2 Roll. Rep. 131 Paul V. Nurse (1828) 8 B. & C. 486 ; 2 M. & Ry. 525 ; 7 L. J. (0.
.
.
clxxix
33 L. T.
12
Paul
(1878) 4 Q. B. D. 9 ; 48 L. J. M. C. 33 ; 39 L. T. 574 27W. R. 215; 14 Cox C. C. 202 385 Paull V. Simpson (1846) o Q. B. 365 ; 15 L. J. Q. B. 382 ; 11 Jur. 13. 1343 Paxton V. Douglas (1803) 8 Ves. 520 1376 Pay's Case (1601) Cro. Eliz. 878 656, 658 Pa^h V. Esdaile (i888) 13 App. Cas. 613 ; 58 L. J. Ch. 299 ; 59 L. T. 568 80 37 W.R. 273 ; 53 J. P. 100
.
Summerhayes
.......
(1856) 22 Beav. 69
.
..... ....
.
149
J. (0. S.
528 1334
S.)
.
K.
B
632
.... .....
;
. i . .
Mortimer (1859) 4 De G. & J. 447 28 L. J. Ch. 716 5 Jur. (N. S. 749 7 W. R. 646 C. A. 1374 Payne v. Porter (1618) Cro. Jac. 490 488 Payne . Rogers (1794) 2 H. Bl. 350 i Dougl. 407 ; 3 R. R. 415 397 Peaceable o. Watson (1811) 4 Taunt. 16 13 R. R. 552 557, 765 Peachy . Somerset (Duke of) (1721) Pre. Cha. 567 S9h 593 Peacock v. Monk (1751) 2 Ves. Sen. 190 906 Pe'arce, Re [1909] i Ch. 819 100 L. T. 699 78 L. J. Ch. 484 25 T. L. R. 497 .S3 Sol. Jo. 419 1^71, 1395 Pearce v. Bulteel [1916] 2 Ch. 544 32 T. L. R. 723. "43 Pearce v. Foster (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 536 55 L. J. Q. B. 306 54 L. T. 664 34 W. R. 602; 51 J. P. 213 213 Pearce v. Gardner (1897) 10 Hare, 287 i W. R. 98. 102 Pearce o. Morris (1869) L. R. 5. Ch. 227; 39 L. J. Ch. 342 ; 22,L.T.i90; ig
v.
;
.
Payne Payne
v. Little
1419
..... .....
;
.
.'
"
....
;
. . .
. 828, 829 L. J. Ch. 492 ; L. R. 20 Eq. 492 . 87 23 W. R. 771 Peardon v. Underbill (1850) 16 Q. B. 120 ; 20 L. J. Q. B. 133 ; 15 Jur. 465. 721 Pearl v. Deacon (1857) 24 Beav. 186 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 879 ; 5 W. R. 702 300
. . . .
W.
R. 196
Pearce
v.
Watts (1875) 44
Pearse v. Green (1819) i J. & W. 140 233, 1123 Pearson v. Dawson (1858) E. B. & E. 448 27 L. J. Q. B. 248 4 Jur. (N. S.) 1015 922 Pearson & Son v. Dublin Corporation [1907] A. C. 351 77 L. J P. C. 1.-541,543 Lemaitre (1843) 5 Man. & G. 700 6 Scott (N. R.) 607 Pearson v. 12 L. J. C. P. 253 ; 7 Jur. 748 521, 522 Pearson v. Pearson (1802) i Sch. & Lef. 10 9 R. R. i 1272 Pechell V. Watson (i84i)'8 M. & W. 691 11 L. J. Ex. 225 496 Peckham v. Peckbam (1788) 2 Bro. C. C. 584 n. 1216 Peek V. Gurney (1873) L. R. 6 H. L. 412 43 L. J. Cb. 19 22 W, R. 29 S39j 540,
; ; ;
.
......
; ; ;
...
541
Peel's Settlement,
Re
[191
1]
j^
Cb. 164
55 Sol. Jo. 580 Peers o. Sneyd (1853) 17 Beav. 151 Peeters v. Opie (1671) 2 Wms. Saund. 346 Pelbam o. Pickersgill (1787) i T. R. 660
.
Pelbam-Clinton
Pells
V.
v.
Newcastle (Duke
of) [1902]
(1620) Cro. Jac. 590 Pember v. Mathers (1779) i Bro. C. C. 52 ; Dick. 550 Pemberton v. Barbara (1590) 4 Rep. 59 b Pemberton v. Barnes [1899] i Cb. 544 68 L. J. Ch. 192
;
Brown
.... ....
i
80 L. J. Ch. 574
10
L. T. 33
Cb. 34
664
191
1376
;
80 L T. 181
47 652
W.
R. 444
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxx
TABLE OF CASES
P.
PAGE Hughes [1899] i Ch. 781 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 281 go L. T. 369 ; 47 W. R. 354-C. A 323 Penn 1). Baltimore (Lord) (1750) ' Ves. Sen. 444 339> "5 416 Penn v. Bittleston (1851) 7 Exch. 152 L.T. Penn 0. Spiers & Pond, Ltd. [1908] i K. B. 766 77 L J. K. B. 542
Pemberton
462, 463 52 Sol. Jo. 280 Penn v. Ward (1835) 2 C. M. & R. 338 437 615 Pennant's Case (1596) 3 Rep. 65 866 Penne v. Peacock (1734) Ca. temp. Talb. 41 6ig Pennington v. Taniere (1848) 12 Q. B. 998 Penny v. Wimbledon Urban Council [1899] 2 Q. B. 76, 392 ; 68 L. J. Q. B 704 80 L. T. 615 47 W. R. 565 63 J. P.*(.o6 C. A. 355 Penruddock's Case (1598) 5 Co. Rep. 100 b 394, 395 '397 L. J. Ex. 103 L. T, Penryn (Mayor) v. Best (1878) 3 Ex. D. 292 48 38 27 W. R. 126 805 694
541
24 T. L. R. 354
Penaon o. Gooday (1633) Cro. Car. 327 Pepin V. Bruyere [1902] i Ch. 24 71 L.
;
504
J. Ch.
39
34-C.A
Percival
o.
Perera v. T. L. R. 389
Hughes (1883)
....
.
.
85 L. T. 461
50
W.
R
1
241
355
;
84 L. T. 371
1256
;
Perham
Perkins;
3
v.
Kempster [1907]
i
i
;
Re [1893]
Ch. 283
757
877
R- 40
Perkins, Re (1909) loi L. T. 345 1081 53 Sol. Jo. 698 Perkins v. Steadi(i907) 23 T. L. R. 433 351 660 Perrin v. Blake (1769) i W. Bl. 672 ; (1772) 4 Burr. 2579 ; i Dougl. 329 n. Perrin^i. Perrin [1914] P. 1355 83 L. J. P. 69; 1 11 L.T. 335 ; 58 Sol. Jo. 513 1204 Perrins o. Bellamy [1899] i Ch. 797 ; 68 L. J. Ch. 397 ; 47 W. R. 417 ; 80 L. T. 478 . . . 1113, 1127, 1 146 Perrot v. Perrot (1744) 3 Atk. 95 . 789 Perrott . Perrott (1811) 14 East, 423 1250 Perry . Barker (1806) 13 Ves. 198. 820 Perry v. Clissold [1907] A. C. 73 ; 76 L. J. P. C. 19 ; 95 L. T. 890 ; 23 T. L. R.
.
.... ......
....... .......
;
Eames
.
[1891]
Ch. 658
60 L. J. Ch. 354
;
64 L. T. 438
;
29
389r39, 765 W. R.
851, 853, 857 Fitzhowe (1846) 8 Q. B. 757 15 L. J. Q. B. 239 10 Jur. 799 399, 400 Phelips (1790I i Ves. Jr. 255 664 ]'. K. B. 236 Wright [1908] i K. B. 441 ; 77 L. 98 L. T. 327 24 T. L. R. 186 451, 463 Perry-Herrick v. Attwood (1857) 2 De G. & J. 21 25 Beav. 205 761 Pertwee v. Townsend [1896] 2 Q. B. 129 65 L. J. Q. B. 659 75 L. T. 104 738 Peruvian Guano Co. v. Dreyfus [1892] A. C. 166 61 L. J. Ch. 749 66 L. T. 536; 7 Asp.'M. L. C. 225 923 Fetch V. Tutin (1846) 15 M. & W. no 15 L. J. Ex. 280 940 Peter v. Compton (1693) Skin. 353 ; Holt, 326 ; i Smith, L. C, iithed. 316 98 Peter v. Rich (1629) i Ch. Rep. 34 297 Peters v. Leeder (1878) 47 L. J. Q. B. 573 1330, 1343 Petre v. Duncombe (1851) 17 L. J. Ch. 370 12 Jur. 261 118 Petrie v. Lamont (1842) C. & M. 93 ; 4 Scott (N. R.) 335 3 Man. & G. 702
.......
; ; ; . ;
;
.......
. .
iiL.
0.
Wms.
25
i
;
Pettey
Sol.
CA
Raym.
;
571
;
337 1307
58
L. T. loii
707
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Petty Petty
V.
clxxxi
PAGE
V.
31
Peytoe's Case (i6ii) 9 Co. Rep. 77 b Phelps o. Lyle (1839) 10 A. & E. 113 Phene's Trusts, Re (1870) L. R. 5 Ch. App. 139 ; 39 L. J. Ch. 316; 22 L. T. Ill ; 18 W. R. 303 Philips V. Philips (1844) 3 Ha. 281 ; 13 L. J. Ch. 445 Phillimore, Re [1904] 2 Ch. 460 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 671 ; 91 L. T. 256 ; 52 W. R,
882 Goods 0/(1824) 2 Add. 336 n. (b) '34' 33 Phaiips, Re (1887) 34 Ch. D. 467 56 L. J. Ch. 337 56 L. T. 144 35 W. R, 284 i' 899 Phillips' Trusts, Re [1903] i Ch. 183 ; 72 L. 88 L. T. 9 C. A. "53 J. Ch. 94 Phillips (Jas.), iJ [1919] i Ch. 128; 88 L. J. Ch. 27; 120 L. T. 213; 63 Sol. Jo. 116; 35 T. L. R. 98 1 174 Phillips V. Barnet (1876) i Q. B. D. 436 45 L. J. Q. B. 277 ; 34 L. T. 177 24 W. R. 345 349 Phillips 0. Bignall (181 1) I Phill. 239 1403 Phillips V. Brooks [1919] 2 K.B. 243 88 L. J. K. B. 953 121 L. T. 249 24 Com. Cas. 263 35 T. L. R. 470 37 Phillips V. Cayley (1889) 43 Ch. D. 222 62 L. T. 86 38 59 L. J. Ch. 177 W. R. 24i^C. A. Phillips V. Eyre (1870) L. R. 6 Q. B. i 10 B. & S. 1004 40 L. J. Q. B. 28 22 L. T. 869 339 Phillips V. Foxall (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 666 41 L. J. Q. B. 293 27 L. T, 20 W. R. 900 231 292 Phillips V. Homfrav (1883) 1 1 App. Cas. 466 24 Ch. D. 439 52 L. J. Ch. 833 49 L. T. 5 32 W. R. 6 C. A 19. 364 Phillips V. L. & S. W. Ry. (1879) 5 Q- B- D. 78 49 L. J. Q. B. 233 41 L. T, 121 ; 28 W. R. 10 C. A 23, 371 Phillips . Phillips (1832) i My. Sc K. 649 ; i L. J. Ch. 214 1361 Phillips V. Probyn [1899] l Ch. 811 68 L. J. Ch. 401 80 L. T. 513 ; i I, 1105 T. L. R. 324 Phillips J). Smith (1845) 14 M. & W. 589 15 L. J. Ex. 201 787 Phillipson v. Hayter (1870) L. R. 6 C. P. 38 40 L. J. C. P. 14; 23 L. T. 56 556; 19 W. R. 130 Phillpotts V. Clifton (1861) 10 W. R. 135 109 8to Phillpotts V. Phillpotts (1850) 10 C. B. 85 ; 20 L. J. C. P. n Philp 0. Squire (1791) Peakc, 11; 471 Philpott V. Jones (1834) 2 A. & E. 41 114 4 N. & M. 14 4 L. J. K. B. 65 Philpott V. Kelley (1835) 3 A. & E. 106 416 Philpotts 0. James (1784) 3 Doug. 425 1304 1248 Phipps p. Anglesey (1751) 7 Bro. P. C. 445 Phypers v. Eburn (1836) 3 Bing. (N. C.) 250 3 Scott, 634 ; 2 Hodges, 230 6 L. J. C. P. 20 598 Piazzi-Smyth, In the Goods o/[i898] P. 7 67 L. J. P. 4 ; 77 L. T. 375 46 ,1246 W. R. 426 Pickard, Re [1894] 3 Ch. 704 64 L. J. Ch. 92 71 L. T. 558 7 R. 479 841 C. A. 32 Pickard v. Sears (1837) 6 A. & E. 469 2 N. & P. 488 Pickard v. Smith (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 470 4 L. T. 470 355 541 Pickering . Dowson (1813) 4 Taunt. 778 Pickering v. James (1873) L. R. ^ C. P. 489 42 L. J. C. P. 217 29 L. T. 529 210 21 W. R. 786 i Stark. 56 16 R. R. 777 381 Pickering o. Rudd (1815) 4 Camp. 219
Phillips,
682
In
the
........
; ; ; ; ; ;
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxxii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Grey (1862) 30 Beav. 352;
706
;
Piekersgill v.
31 L. J. Ch.
. .
S.)
632
5 L. T.
v.
10
W.
5
R. 207
Ch. D. 163
663, 1075
.
Piekersgill
Rodger (1877)
1279
Pickett o. Packham (1868) L. R. 4Ch. App. 190; 16 W. R. 1177 551 Pickford o. Grand Juriction Ry. (1841) 8 M. & W. 372 ; 9 D. P. C. 766 ; 2 Railw. Cas. 592; 5 Jur. 731 . . 249, 250 Pidcock V. Bishop (1825) 3 B. & C. 605 ; 5 D. & R. 505 ; 3 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. . . . . . 292 109 ; 27 R. R. 430 Piercy, Re [1895] i Ch. 83 ; 64 L. J. Ch. 249 ; 71 L. T. 745 ; 43 W. R. 134.; 1 105 13 R. 106 Piercy v. Fynney (1871) 40 L. J. Ch. 404 ; L. R. 12 Eq. 69 ; 19 W. R. 710 58. Piggot V. Penrice (1717) Gilb. Eq. Ca. 137 ; i Com. 250 870 Piggott V. Birtles (1836) I M. & W. 441 ; 2 Gale, 18 ; i Tyr. & Gr. 729 ; 5 L. J.
. . . .
...
.
...........
. . . ,
....
;
. . .
Ex. 193 V. Middlesex County Council [1909] i Ch. 134 77 L. J. Ch. 813 99 L.T. 662; 72 J. P. 461 ; 52 Sol. Jo. 698; 6 L. C. R. 1 177 Pigot's Case (1614) 11 Rep, 26 b 2 Bulst. 246 i RoU. Rep. 39 43, Pigot V. Bullock (1792) I Ves. Jr. 479 2 R. R. 148 ,. 3 Bro. C. C. 589 Pigot V. Cubley (1864) 15 C. B. N. S. 701 33 L. J. G. P. 134 ; 9 L. T. 804 " 10 Jur. (N. S.) 318 12 W. R. 467 Pike o. Harsen (1591) 3 Leon. 233 Pike o. Ongley (1887) 18 Q. B. D. 708 56 L. J. Q. B. 373 ; 35 W. R. 534 Pike V. Stephens (1848) 12 Q. B. 465 ; 6 Dow. & L. 157 17X. J. Q. B. 282
Piggott
; ; ; ; ;
12 Jur. 748 530 Pilcher 0. Rawlins (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 259 41 L. J. Ch. 485 ; 25 L. T. . 921 ; 20 W. R. 281 756, 757, 1141 Pilkington 11. Scott (1846) 15 M. & W. 657 ; 15 L. J. Ex. 329 ; 475 Pill V. Towers (1600) Cro. Eliz. 791 851 Pinchon's Case (161 1) 9 Rep. 86 b ; Cro. Jac. 293 ; 2 Brownl. 137 HI,
;
'.
244, 1349
Pinhoru
v.
22 L. J. Ex. 266
16 Jur. looi
w:
R. 336
.
.
644,
647
1276
95 1346
Pink, Re [1912] 2 Ch. 529 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 753 R. 107 L. T. 241 ; 28 T, 528 ; 56 Sol. Jo. 668 C. A. Pinnel's Case (1602) 5 Rep. 117 a Pinney v. Pinney (1828) 8 B. & C. 335 Piper . Piper (i86o) i J. & H. 91 29 L. J. Ch. 719 6 Jur. (N. S.) 1026 L. T. 458 ; 8 W. R. 543 Piper V. Winnifrith (1917) 34 T. L. R. 108 Pippett o. Hearn (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 634 ; i Dow. & Ry. 266 Pitcher v. Tovey (1692) 4 Mod. 71 ; i SaUc. 81 ; 2 Vent. 234 ; 3 Lev, 295 I Show. 340 ; Carth. 177 12 Mod. Rep. 23 Holt (K. B.) 73 Pittj). Donovan (1813) 1 M. & S. 639 14 R. R. 535 Pittard o. Oliver [1891] i Q. B. 474 60 L. J. Q. B. 219 64 L. T. 758 39 W. R. 311 ; 55 J. P. 100 Plaice V. Allcock (1866) 4.F. & F. 1674 Planch* V. Colburn (1831) 8 Bing. 14 5 Car. & P. 58 i M. & Scott, 51;
. . ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
589 337 49
1365
406
5ig
963
321
L.J.C.P.7
Planck V. Anderson (1792) 5 T. R. 40 Plasycoed Collieries Co. . Partridge [1912] i K. B. 345 106 L. T. 426 56 Sol. Jo. 327
;
53
;
L. J. K. B,723
973
801
Piatt
Sleap (161 1) Cro. Jac. 275 Player v. Fsxhall (1826) i Russ. 538
0.
; .
1383
32 R. R. 793
.
Playford v. Hoare (1829) 3 Y. & J. 175 Pleadal . Gosmore (1625) Winch, 124
553
699
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Pledge
V.
clxxxiii
PAGE
65 L. J.:h. 449
74.L. T. 323
589
Plews
Samuel [1904] i Ch. 464; 73 L. J. Ch. 27$; 90 L. T. 533; 52 R. 410 . Plimmer v. Wellington (Mayor of) (1884) L. R. g App. Cas. 659 ; 53 L. J. P. C. 104; 51 L.T. 475; 49 J. P. 116 Plummer, Re [1900] 2 Q.B. 790; 69 L. J. Q.i B. 936; 83 L. T. 387; 48 W. R. 634C. A , i.
V.
...
;
.
44 W. R.
833
188
W.
.....
,i
.
.840
.
1069
.
Plummer
Polak
V.
v.
David [1920]
1
628
.
35 L. T. 350
.
298
Polglass
Oliver (1831) 2 C.
Tvr. 89
I
J
L. J.
Ex.
;
5
.
.
.
107, 108
Pollard Pollard
10 Jur. 11 435 Ch. Repi 1815: 1-870 V. Photographic Co. (l888) 40 Ch. D. L, J. Ch. 251 60 345 ; 58 t. T. 4i8;,37W. R. 266 223,427 Pollock, iJ;(i88sj 28 Ch. D. 552; 54 L. 1285 J. Ch. 489'; 52 L. T. 718 C. A. . Pollock, Re [J906J I Ch. 146 884 75 L. J, Ch. 120 94 L. T. 92; 54 W. R. 267 Polsue V. Rushmer [1907] A. C. I2i 6 L. J. Ch. 365 ; 96 L. T. 510 23 T. L. R. 362 H. L.. 401 Pomeroy, Ltd. o. Scale (i9o6t-7)i 23 T. L. R. 170 103 Pomfret v. Ricroft (1669) i Wms. Saund. 321 386, 637, 705, 709 Pomfret (Earl)?. Windsor (Lord) {1752) 2 Ves. Sen. 482 . 643 Ponselle v. Webber [1908I i Ch. 254 98 L. T. 375 24 77 L. J. Ch. 253 T. L. R. 190 955 Ponsonby, In the Goods of [1895] P. 287 ; 64 L. J. P. 1.19 44 W. R. 240 R. 613 1340 Ponting V. Noakes [1894] 2 Q. B. 281.; 63 L. J. Q. B. 549 70 L. T. 842 58 L 775 J. P. 559 ; 42 W. R. 506; 10 R. 265 Pool V. Pool (1889) 58 L. J. P. 67 61 iL. T. 401 238 Poole's Case (1703) I Salk. 368 .. ;.: 788 Poole's & Clarke's Contract [1904] 2,Ch. 173 73 L. J. Ch. 612; 91 L. T. 20 T. L. R. 604 275 ; S3 W. R. 122 Poole o. Hill (1840I 9 D. P. C. 300 ; 6 M. & W. 835 10 L. J. Ex. 81 . 188, 19O .: Poole . Nedham (i 608) Yelv. 149 . 560 Poole 0. Shergold (1786) 2 Bro. C. C. u8 ; i Cojt, 273 i R. R. 37 191 Poole . Tumbridge (1837) 2 M. & W. 223 .: Pope . Garland (1841)4 Y. &C. Ex. 394; 10 L. J. Ex. Eq. 13 187 Pope . Onslov? (1692) 2 Vern. 286. !. . 834 . Popham V. Woolcot (1666) i Sid. 291 849 Popplewell V. Hodkinson (1869) L. R. 4 Ex. 248 38 L. J. Ex. 126 ; 20 L. T.
.
* Q- S- '97
L. J. K.B, 92 '5 L. J. Q. B. 70
J39, 540
V.
Greenvil (1662)
Ca. Cha. 10
'
....
. ; .
.
I
....
;
. .
...
. ;
..,.....,
|
'
.191
.
'.
...
. .
.112
. .
'
403, 771 Saund., 1871 ed.,1548 ; i L6v. 274 T. Raym. 'i I Saund. J19 2 Keb. 533 ,. 134 183; I Sid. 423 Portal V. Lamb, Re (1885) 30 Ch. D. 50 ; 54 t.-J. Ch. 1012 53 L. T. 650 ; 1262 33 W. R. 859C. 31B Porter o. Freudenberg [1915] I K. B. 857 Portington's (Mary) Case (1614) 10 Rep. 35 a, 4i a 560, 563, 564 Portland (Duke of) v. Hill (1866) L..R. 2 Eq. 765 ; 35 L. J. Ch. 439 ; 12 Jur.
;
578
Wms.
'
.(N. S.)286; 15W. R. 38 584,594,606,607 Portland (Duke of) v. Topham (1864) 11 H. L. C. 32 34 L. J. Ch. 113,; 10 l ..! . fi . 871 L. T. 355; 10 Jur. (N. S.)50i ; 12W. R. 697 Porton V. Unemployed Committee [1909] i K. B. 173 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 139; . . . . . 100 L. T. 102 ; 73 J. P. 43 25 T. L. R. 102 457
; . . ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxxiv
K
TABLE OF CASES
PAGfi
.
L. B. &. S. C.
706 73 J- P- (Journal) 624. . Postlethwaite v. Mouflsey (1842) 6 Ha. 33 n. . . 1420 Eatinger . Weightman (1817) 3 Mer. 67 ; 17 R. R. 20 3 202 Pott 0. Qegg (l8t^9) 16 M. & W. 321 ; i& L. J. Ex. 210 ; 11 Jur. 289. loi Potter a. Duffield (1874) 43 L. J. Ch. 472 ; L. R. 18 Eq. 4 ; 22 W. R. 585 Potters, Inland Revenue Commissioners (1854) loExch. 147; 23 L. J.- Ex. . . 1029,1030 345; 18 Jur. 778 ; 2 W. R. 561 . Potter o. North (1669) I Wms. Saund. 346 "S' .716 Poulett. Peerage Case [.igogJ.iA. C. 395 72 L. J. K. B. 924 19 T. L. R. 644 1207 Poulett (Earl) 0. Hood (1868) L. R. 5 Eq, 115 ; 37 L. J. Ch. 224; 17 L. T. . / . . 189 P)486; 16W. R., 323 < Poulterers' Case (i6n) 9 Rep. 55 b ; Moor; 813 . 482 Poulton.0. L. & S. W. Ry. (1867) L. R. 2 Q.B. 534 ; 8 B. & S. 616 ; 36 L. J. 16 W. R. 309 /. Q. B. 294; 17.L. T. ; Poulton. Moore [I9IS] i K. B. 400 84 L. J. K. B. 462 ; 112 L. T. 202 ; -.'.' 811 31 T. L. .R. 43 C. A Pountney 0. Clayton (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 838 ; 52 L. J. Q. B. 5665 49 L. T. >,<. . 381 283 ; 3J W. R. 664 ; 47 J. P. 788 C. A. Powdrdl V. Jones (1854) 2 Sm. & 0.407 24 L. J. Ch. 123 ; 18 Jur. iiii ; 1324 3 W. R. 32 ; 3 Eq. R. 63 Powell, Re [1898] i Ch. 227 ; 67 L. J. Ch. 148 1286 77 L. T. 649 ; 46 W. R. 23J . V Powell o. Birmingham Vinegar Co. [1896] 2 Ch. 54 1028 Ppwell o. Brodhurst [1901] 2 Ch. 160 j 70 L. J. Ch. 587; 84 L. T. 620; 49W..R. 532 . 157, 158 C. A. Pewell V. Browne (1907-8) 97 L. T. 167, 854 ; 24 T. L. R. 71 759 "' .'i Powell . Evans (1801) 5 Ves; 839 .' 'I . 1403 Powell 11. FaE (1880) 5 Q. B. D.. 597 49 L. J. Q.B. 428 43 L. T. 562 C. A. 345 Powell V. Hemsley (1909] 2 CK 252 ;,, 78 L. J. Ch. 741 lai L. T. 262 ; 25 T. L. R. 649 C. A. 807 Powell . Jones [1905] iK. B. 11 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 115 ; 92 L. T. 430 ; 53 !( . W. R. 277 ; 21 T. L. R. 5.5 231,233 Powell V. Powell (r866) L. R. i P. & M. 209 35 L.. J. P. 100 ; 14 L. T. jO . . . 800 . 1250 Powell 0. Riley (1871) L. R. 12 Eq. 175 ; 46 L. J. Ch. 533 19 W. R. 869 . 1393 Power 0. Banks [1901] 2 Ch. 487 ; 70 L. J, Ch. 700 ; 85 L. T. 376 ; 49 W. R. .r', . \p 10,976 679; 66. J. P. 21 ; 17 T. L. R. 621 ;!', '*. Powero. Hayne (1869) L. R. 8 Eq. a62;Ji7 W. R. 782 . . 44 ij.'-> . Powis 0. Corbet (1747) 3 Atk. 556 .-! <}, .' . 1392
....
. . . . . . . ; . .
'
-352
:'
.'.....
. ;
...
.
'
'
.......
; ; . . ;
.
Powsley
Praed
I""
v.
Graham
.......
. .
642,643
(1889) 24 Q: B. D. 53
C.
A
; ;
59 L. J. Q. B. 230
5
38
W.
Pratt D. Bristol Medical Association [1919] i K. B. 244 88 L. J. K. B. 628 120 L. T. 41 63 Sol. Jo. 84 35 T. L. R. 14 480, 486 Pratt V. Swaine (1828) 8 B. & C. 285 ,6 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 353 2 M. & Ry. ^ 1348 35 . Prattle v. Kmg (1681) Sir T. Jones, 169 1349 Prehn v. Royal Bank of Liverpool (i-Sye) 39 L. J. Ex. 41 L. R. 5 Ex. 92 18 W. R. 463 .,,.(.-. 21 L. T. 830 Preston , Love (1607) Noy, I20 763 Preston v. Luck (1884) 27 Ch. D. 497 126, 375 Pretty v. Bickmore (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 401 j 28 L. T. 704 21 W. R. 733. 397 Pretty v. Pretty [191 1] P. 83 80 L. P. 19 ; 104 L. T. 79 27 T. L. R. J. . . , , . . H9I) 1192 169
. :
........ ......
; . . . .
.123
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Price,
ckxxv
Re [1900] 1 Ch. 442 ; 69 L. J. Ch. 225 ; 82 L. T. 79 ; 48 W. R. 373 ; 16 T. L. R. 189 1241, 1245 Price V. Easton (1833) 4 B. & Ad. 433 ; i N. & M. 303 ; 2 L. 103 J. K. B. 51 . Price V. John [1905] i Ch. 744 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 469 ; 92 L. T. 768 ; 53 W. R456
Price Price Price
V.
(1864) 3 H. & C. 437 ; 34 L. J. Ex. 35 ; 11 L. T. 314 o. Moulton (1851) 10 C. B. 561 0. Price [191 1] P. 201 ; 80 L. J. P. 145 ; 105 L. T. 441 ; 27 T. L. R, 560; 55 Sol. Jo. 689 Price V. Seeley (1843) 10 CI. & F. 28 . . . Price . Strange ^1820) 6 Madd. 161 ; 22 R. R. 266 Price V. Union Lighterage Co. [1904] i K. B. 412 ; 73 L. B. 222 ; 89 J. K. L. T. 731 ; 52 W. R. 325 i 9 Com. Cas. 120 ; 20 T. L. R. 177 . . Prichard v. Prichard (1864) 3 Sw. & Tr. 524 Priddy v. Rose (1817) 3 Mer. 86 ; 17 R. R. 24 1143, Prideaux v. Warne (1673) T. Raym. 232 Pridgeon v. Mellor (1912) 28 T. L. R. 261 Priestley v. Fernie (1865) 3 H. & C. 977 ; 34 L. J. Ex. 172 ; 11 Jur. (N. S. 813 ; 13 L. T. 208 ; 13 W. R. 1089 Priestley v. Fowler (1837) 3 M. & W. i ; Murph. & H. 305 ; 7 L. fex. 42
Kirkham
.......
.
740 294
149
...
1190
1307
.437
252
1201
......
J.
1147 682
971
64
I Jur. 987 Prince's (The) Case (1605) 8 Rep. 17 Prince v. Oriental Bank (1878) 3 Ap'p. Cas. 325 41 ; 26 W. R. 543
a.
448 560.
;
47 L.
;
J. P. C.
42
38 L. T.
Prince Albert v. Strange (1848) 2 De G. & Sm. 652 13 Jur. 507 Princess Thurn, &c. v. Moffitt [1915] {see " Thurn ").
8 M. & W. 873 10 L. J. Ex. 371 Hitchcock (1843) 6 M. & G. 151 ; 6 Scott (N. R.) 851 12 L. J, C. P. 322 Probert 0. CliflFord (1739) i Ambl. 6 Prodgers v. Langham (1663) i Sid. 133 16 W. R. 445 Prole . Soady (1868) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 220 37 L. J. Ch. 246 Prosser v. Edmonds (1835) i Yo. & C. (Ex.) 481 Proud V. Bates (1864) 34 L. J. Ch. 406 ; 13 L. T. 61 1 1 Jur. (N. S.) 441 6 New Rep. 92 Proud V. Turner (1729) 2 P. Wms. 560 Prowse V. Spurway (1877) 46 L. J. P. D. & A. 49 26 W. R. 1 16 Pryce, Re (1877) 4 Ch. D. 685 36 L. T. 1 17 25 W. R. 432 Pryse, In the Goods o/[i904] P. 301 73 L. J. P. 84 90 L. T. 747 C. A.
Prior
V.
Henibrow (1841)
0.
.
Pritchard
196
496
781 1310
1171 841
1330,
......
. ;
"347 Prytherch, Re (1889) 42 Ch. D. 590 59 L. J. Ch. 79 W. R. 61 Public Works Commissioner v. Hills [1906] A. C. 368 ; 22 T. L. R. 589 P- C 94 L. T. 833 Pugh V. Leeds (Duke of) (1777) 2 Cowp. 714 PuUen V. Serjeant (1684-5) ^ Ch. Rep. 300 Pulleyne v. France (1913) 57 Sol. Jo. 173 C. A Pullman o. Hill & Co. [1891] i Q. B. 524 60 L. J. Q. B. 39 W. R. 263 Puhnan v. Meadows [1901] i Ch. 233 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 97 Punchard, In the Goods 0/(1872) L. R. 2 P. & M. 369 L. T. 526 : 20 W. R. 446 Purcell V. Horn (1838) 8 A. & E. 602 ; 3 Nev. & P. 564
; ; ; ; ;
;
61 L. T. 799
38
819
75 L. J. P. C. 69
;
......
299
;
137 615
1339 806
64 L. T. 691
55, 518
84 L. T. 26 . 41 L. J. P. 25
;
1380
1330
26
Purcell
V.
.
Macnamara
Purefoy
......
7 L. J. Q. B. 228
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxxvi
TABLE OF CASES
;
46 L.
W,
V.
R. 362
Pusey
Pust
V. 34 L. J. Q. B. 127 ; 13 W. R. 459 Ex. Ch 135, 147 Putt 0. Roster (1682) 2 Mod. 318; 3 Mod. i; Poll. 634; Skin. 48 2 Show.* 2:1; T. Raym. 472 947 PwUbach Colliery Co. v. Woodman [1915] A. C. 634 ; 84 L. J. K. B. 874 113 L. T. 10; 31 T. L. R. 271H. L. (E.) ,; 394 . Pybus j. Mitford (1674) I Vent. 372 1263 Pye, ;c^ae (1811) 18 Ves* 140 1282,1283 R.,R. 173 Pyke, Ex parte; Lister, In re (1878) 8 Ch. D. 754 47 L. J. K. B. 100 38 L. T. 923; 26W.R.!8o6 Pyle, Re [1895] i Ch. 724 64 L. J. Ch. 477 ; 72 L. T. 327 ; 43 W. R. 420 ; 1361 13 R. 396 Pyle Works, Re (1890) 44 Ch. D. 534 62 L. T. 887 59 L. J. Ch. 489 1008 38 W. R. 674 ; 2 Meg. 83 C. A Pym V. G. N. Ry. (1863) 4 B. & S. 396 32 L. J. Q. B. 377 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 8 L. T. 734 iiW. R. 922 ., 199 473
;
...
...
J. C. P.
308
.
36 L. T. 416
. .
526
929, 934
........
. .
....
;
.312
;
Pym V. Pym 0.
HarrisT)n (1876) 33 L. T.
796C;
Cr.
A.
.671
.
Lockyer (1841)
My. &
39
o. Downs (1677) 2 Mod. 176 Quarm v. Quarm [1892] j Q. B. 184 61 L. J. Q. W. R. 302 Quarman 0. Burnett (1840) 6 M. & W. 499
Quadring
.......
;
10 L. J. Ch. 153
5 Jur.
34
1283
1217
573
B. 154
66 L. T. 418
40
9 L.
J.
Ex. 308
4 Jur.
969 Quartz Hill Gold Mining Co. 0. Eyre (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 674 ; 52 L. J. Q. B. 488 49 L. T. 249 31 W. R. 668 487, 488, 491, 495 Quick, /niA^Goo^so/^[i899] P. 187; 68 L. J. P.. 64; 80 L. T. 808 1336 QuickC's Trusts, Re [1908] i Ch. 887 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 523 192, 98 L. T. 6io 306, 1 120 Quinn o. Butler (1868) L. R. 6 Eq.. 225 1250 Quinn o. Leathern [1901] A. C. 510 70 L. J. P. C. 76 ; 85 L. T. 289 ; 50 W. R. 139 6s J. P. 708 479484
-351
.
R.,
R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R.
V.
[1906] I Ch. 730 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 421 ; 54 W. R. 578 ; 94 L. T. 494 377 Ashwell (1810) 12 East, 22 12 V. Barnardo (1889) 23 Q. B. D. 305 61 L. T. 547 ; 58 L. J. Q. B. 55J 37W. R. 789 C.'A 1216,1225 0. Bayly (1841) i Dr. & W. 213 986 4 Ir. Eq. R. 142 11. Bennett (1866) 4 F. & F. 1105 433 V. Bettesworth (1734) 2 Stra. 956 1340 V. Birmingham (1828) 8 B. & C. 29 ; 6 L. (O. S.) M. C. 67 2M, &Ry. J. 1 163 230 . Bongbey (1823) i B. cSc C. 565 ; 25 R. R. 516 595 V. Bower (J823) i B. & C. 498; 2 D. & R. 842 ; i L. J. (O. S.) K. B.
Re
....
.
'
no
'
Bradford (1813)
J. P,
V.
V.
V.
V.
75 L. J. K. B. 64 ; 93 L. T. 401 ; ,69 ; 21 T. L. R. 727 Brampton (1808) 10 East, 282 ; 10 R. R. 289 Brasier (1779) i Leach, C. L. 199 ; i East, P.C. 443 Brewer's Co. (1824) 3 B. & C. 172 ; 4 D. & R. 492 ; 27 R. R. 318
....
. . .
9 217
4!JI
370
1167 25
593 683
V.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
R. R. R.
i).
clxxxvii
W.
V.
V.
B.
&
S.
447; 30 L.
.
J.
M.
C. 197;
5 L.
(1883) 10 Q. B. D. 381 ; 52 L. J. M. C. 49 W. R. 460 i 47 J. P. 327 ; 15 Cox, C. C. 19$ . R. V. Bunn (1872) 12 fox, C. C. 316 .
Brown
..
. ;
R. V. Burdett (1696) i Ld. Raym. 148 R. ..Burnett (1815) 4 M. & S. 272 ; 16 R. R. 468 R. V. Butler (1679) 2 Ventr. 344 R. V. Cambrian Ry. (1871) L. R. 6 Q. B. 422 40 L. J. Q. 84; 19 W. R. 1 138 R. V. Campbell (1827) i Mood. C. C. 179 R. V. Capper (1817) 5 Price, 217 R. V. Case (1850) Den. C. C. 580 ; 4 Cox, C. C. 220 ; Temple New Sess. Cas. 347 19 L. J. M. C. 174 14 Jur. 489 R. 0. Chadwick (1847) n Q. B. 205
.... ....
.
& M.
318
4
433
1 1 1
72,
173
R.
R. R.
R. R. R.
R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R.
R. R. R.
R.
Charles (1861) 17 Cox, C. C. 499 31 L. J. M. C. 69 7 Jur. (N. S.) 1308 L. & C. 90 5 L. T. 328 ; 10 W. R. 62 404 V. Chawton (1841) i Q. B. 247 4 P. & D. 525 ; 10 L. J. M. C. 55 69 V. Chetwynd (1828) 7 B. & C. 703 i M. & Ry. 534 6 L. J. (O. S.) M. C. 49 31 R. R. 282 9 V. Chillesford (1825) 4 B. & C. 94 1235 Chorley (1848) 12Q. B. 515; 12 Jur. 822 ?>. 3 Cox, C. C. 262 852 V. Clarence (1888) 23 Q. B. D. 23 58 L. J. M. C. 10 ; 59 L. T. 780 ; 37 ; W. R. 166 16 Cox, C. C. 511 53 J. P. 149 433 o. Clarke (1857) 7 E. & B. 186 ; 26 L. 3 Jur. (N. S.) 335 J. Q. B. 169 441, 1215 5 W. R. 222 V. Clinton (1869) 4 Ir. R. (C. L.) 6 411 D. Coggan (1805) 6 East, 431 593 . Cole (1847) 2 Cox, C. C. 340 409 V. Coney (1882) 8 Q. B. D. 534 ; 15 Cox, C. C. 46 ; 51 L. J, M. C. 66 ; 46 L. T. 307 30 W. R. 678 ; 46 J. p. 404 433 446 V. Cornish (1854) Dears. 425 6 Cox, C. C. 432 409 /. Cotterill (1827) i.fi. & Aid. 67; 2 Chit. 487 693 -u. Cotton (1751) Parker, loi 411 V. Crediton (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 493 216 9 L. J. (O. S.) M. C. 89
V.
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
.......... ........
; ;
.
......
.
V. V.
Dare (i86i) 2
F.
&
F. 355
;
594
1
De Manneville
Dendy
Smith, 358
7 R. R. 693
1225,
1226
V.
.
i B. C. C. in (1852) 22 L. J. Q. B. 39 DilUngton (1689) Freem. K. B. 494 Druitt (1867) lo Cox, 592 DuUingham (1838) 8 A. & E. 858 I P. & D. 172;
; ;
.
593 595
v.
i>.
482
1
W. W. & H.
865 598
R.
V.
W. R.
R. R.
V. Ellis
....
.
23 L. J. Ex. 42;
18 Jur. 834;
1
(1888) 16 Cox, 469 56 L.J. Q.B. 315; 57 V. Essex C. C. Judge (1887) 18 Q. B. D. 704 L. T. 643 ; 35 W. R. 511 C. A. 27L. J. Q. B. 132; 4jur. (N. S.) R. -0. Eton College (1857) 8 E. & B. 610 335 ; 6 W. R. 72 R. -u. Fagham Commissioners (1828) 8 B. & C. 355 ; 2 Man. & Ry. 468 R. V. Flattery (1877) 2 Q. B. D. 410 ; 46 L. J. M. C. 130 ; 36 L. T. 32 ; 25 W. R. 398 ; :3 Cox, C. C. 388
67 170
117
Digitized
by Microsoft
clxxxviii
TABLE OF CASES
. .
R. R. R.
R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R.
R.
Flinton(i83o) I B. & Ad. 227i 9L. J. (O. S.)M. C. 33 .1181 Forty Nine Casks of Brandy (i836).3 Hagg. Adm. 257 . 700 -0. Glyde (1868) i C. C. R. 18 L. T. 613 :6 139 ; 37 L. J. M. C. 107 W. R. 1174; II Cox, C. C. 103 924 V. Goodbody (1838) 8 C. & P. 46; 409 211 o. Great Yarmouth (1816) 5 M. & S. 114 0. Greenhill (1836) 4 A. & E. 624 6 N. & M. 244 1225 o. Gyngall [1893] 2 Q. B. 232 ; 62 L. 69 L. T. 4i ; 57 J. P. J. Q. B. 559 1220 773 ; 4 R. 448 C. A. 0., Halifax [1891] i Q. B. 796 4 F.I. & Bl. 647 3 C. L. R. 843 : 24 L. J. M. C. 65 I Jur. (N. S.) 181 426 3 W. R. 239 V. Ham (1839) 8 L. 593 J. Q. B. 265 V. Hands (1887) 16 Cox, C. C. 189 52 J. P. 24 56 L. T. 370 409 f. Hanger (1614) 3 Bulstr. i 698, 704 . Harris (1831) I B. & Ad. 936; 9L. J. (O. S.)K. B. 165 9 . Harris (1871) L. R. I C. C. R. 282 V. Havering-atte-Bower (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 691 2 Dow. & Ry. 176 n. ; 24 R. R. 532' 684 o. Hendon (1788) 2 T. R. 484 591, 593
o. V.
.......
; ;
.
...
. .
.
...
.
.........
;
.404
t o.
154; 3 Cox, C. C. 582 409 Holmes (1883) 12 Q. B. D. 23 53 L. J. M. C. 37 49 L. T. 540 32 '^404 W. R. 392 15 Cox, C. C, 343 R. V. Hopley (i860) 2 F. & F. 202 1225 R. 11. Hornchurch (18181 2 B. & Aid. 189 558 R. /. Howes (i860) 3 E. & E. 332 30 L. J. M. C. 47 7 Jur. (N. S.) 22 suknom. Ex pane Basford, 3 L. T. 467 9 W. R. 99 8 Cox, C. C. 405 441, 1225, 1226 R. V. Humphery (1825) McCIe. & Y. 173 29 R. R. 783 961 R. V. Humphreys [1914] 3 K. B. 1237 84 L. J. K. B. 187 1 1 1 L. T. 1 1 10 ; 1213 79 J. P. 66 ; 30 T. L. R. 698 R. . Isley (1836) 5 A. & E. 441 6 N. & M. 730 2 5 L. J. K. B. 253 H. & W. 196 -122; R. V. Jackson [1891] l Q. B. 671 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 346 ; 64 L. T. 679 ; 39 W. R.
V.
.
....... ........
C. C.
673
602
zCar.
& Kir.
;
983
14 Jur.
+7; 55J-P-246
R.
o. Joliffe
(1823) 2 B.
&
C.
.
54
i
.
R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R.
R.
240 ; 26 R. R. ^64 Jones (1832) 4 B. & Ad. 345 o. Journeyman Tailors (1721) 8 Mod^
V. V. o.
1).
icing's
Lynn
(1826) 6 B.
i
&
C.
Kinnersley (1719)
Str. 193
R.
R. R. R.
6 N. & M. 203 9 Leggatt (1852) 18 Q. B. 781 sub nom. Sandilands, Ex parte, 21 L. J. Q. B. 31Z; 17 Jur. 317 471,1181 -u. Linneker [1906] 2 K. B. 75 L. J. K. B. 385 ; 94 L. T. 856 ; 54 99 W. R. 494 70 J. P. 293 22 T. L. R. 495 431 i N. & M. 576 V. Longnoff (1833) A B. & Ad. 647 2 L. J. M. C. 62 53 L. T. 583 V. McDonald (1885) 15 Q. B. D. 323 W. R. 735 ; 15 52 33 P. 695 Cox, C. C. 757 49 J. 347 V. Mann (1726) Gilb. Eq. Rep. 223 1348
.
; . . .
.
858 481
97
1).
....
; ; ;
.
-0.
441
;
V.
28 L. T. 777
. .
;
.
409
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
R. R. R.
V.
clxxxix
PAGE
Minis (1844) 10 CI. & F. 534 ; 8 Jur. 717 1 1 169 1 57, V. Moore (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 184 i L. 402 J. M. C. 30 V. Munslow [1895] 1 Q. B. 758 ; 64 L. J. M. C. 138 ; 72 L. T. 301 ; 43 W. R. 495; 15 R. 192 507 R. V. Naguib [1917] i K. B. 379 86 L, J. K B. 709; 116 L. T. 640; 8 P. 116 1 172 J. R. a. Nash (1883) 10 Q. B. D. 454 48 L. T. 447 3 52 -J- I B. 442 W. R. 420 C. A. 1216 R. J). New (1904) 20 T. L. R. 583 C. A. 6, 1225 R. V. Oakley (1809) 10 East, 491 I, 1232 R. V. Osbourne (1803) 4 East, 335 3 R. V. Oxford (Bishop) (1806) 7 East, 600 865 R. I/. Patteson (1832) 4 B. & Ad. 9 i Nev. & M. 612 2 L. J. K. B. 33 743 R. V. Pear (1779) i Leach, 212 2 East, P. C. 685, 697 3 R. R. 703 409 .' R. f. Posmore (1789) 3 T. R. 199 13 R. V. Price (1884) 12 Q. B. D. 247 53 L. J. M. C. 51 33 W. R. 45 n. Cox, C. C. 389 1402 R. V. Raynes (1698) i Salk. 299 1332 R. V. Reed (1854) i Dears. 257 ; 2 C. L. R. 607 ; 23 L.J. M. C. 25 18 Jur, 2 W. R. 190 6 Cox, C. C. 284 67 408 R. V. Reeve (1631) 2 Bulstr. 344 1213 R. V. Rennett (1788) 2 T. R. 197 593 R. V. Richardson (1758) i Burr. 517 12 R. V. Riley (1853) i Dears. 149 22 L. J. M. C. 48 6 Cox Jur. 189 C. C. 88 921 R. 0. Rogier (1823) i B. & C. 272 2 D. & R. 431 25 R, R- 393 404 R. V. Roswell (1698) 2 Salk. 499 681 R. V. Rymer (1877) 2 Q. B. D. 136; 46 L. J. M. C. 108; 35 L- T. 774 W. R. 415 13 Cox, C. C. 378 244 R. V. Saddlers' Co. (1863) 10 H. L. C. 404 12 R. V. St. George (1840) 9 C. & P. 483 431, 432 R. V. St. Giles in the Fields (1847) 11 Q. B. 173, 244 "73 R. V. St. John, Devizes (1829) 9 B. & C. 896 209 R. V. St. Mary's, Warwick (1853) i El. & El. 816 22 L J. M. C. 109 I
; .
.
Jur. 551
R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R.
V. K.
.
L. J. M,
C.7
67 1232
Smith (1836) I M. C. C. 473 . Smith (1837) 8 C. &P. 153 V. Smith (1853) 22 L. J. Q. B. 116 V. Sourton (1836) 5 A. & E. 180 5 N. & IV^. 575
; .
82,
1216
L. J.
M.
C. 100
H.
& W.
209
R. R. R.
R.
R. R. R,
Stanton (1606) Cro. Jac. 259 -0. Starkey Will. Woll. & Dav, 502 2 Nev. & P. 169 (1837) 7 A. & E. gs 6 L. J. K. B. 202 I Lev. V. Starling et al. (1664) i Keb. 675 ; i Sid. 174 12s V. Staverton (1610) Yelv. 190 County Court Judge [1910] 2 K. B. 410 sub nom. R. v. FarnV. Surrey ham and Aldershot County Court Judge and Cope, 79 L. J. K. B. 802 103 L. T. 250 ; 26 T. L. R. 503 V. Sutton (1670) I Saund. 273 & S. 73) o. Sutton (i767)-^R. v. Vantandillo (1815) 4 i V. Sutton (1835) 3 A. & E. 597 ; 4 L. J. K. B. 215 ; 5 N. & M. 353 H. & W. 428 776, 1231, V. Symondson (1896) 60 J. P. 645
V.
. ; . .
1207 684
693
482 684
82
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxc
TABLE OF CASES
Talbot (1633) Cro. Car. 311 V. Thanies Ditton (1785) 4 Dougl. 300 207 8 Jur. (N. S.) 1 162 i V. Thompson (1862) L. & C. 225 ; 32 L. J. M. C. 57 II W. R. 41 ; 9 Cox, C. C. 222 7 L. T. 983 R. V. Toddington (1818) i B. & Aid. 560 776, 1 217 R. V. Vantandillo (1815) 4 M. & S. 73 ; 16 R. R. 389 402 2 East, P. C. 570 R. V. Waite (1743) i Leach, 28 R. V. Wantage (189,1) i East, 601 217 R. V. Warburton (1870) L. R. i C. C. 276 40 L. J. M. C. 22 ; 23 L. T, 473; 481 19 W. R. 165 ; II Cox, C. C. 584 R. V. Wellesley (Lord) (1853) 2 E. & B. 924 591 4B. & C. 481 2 R. . Westwood (1830) 7 Bing. i 4 Bligh (N. S.) 213 12 Dow. & C. 21 7 D. & R. 267 R. V. Wilby (1814) 2 M. & S. 504 ; 15 R. R. 328 1231 2 East, P. C. 673 R. V. Wilkins (1789) i Leach, 520 408 10 Mod. 63 R. V. Williams (171 1) i Salk. 383 404 R. V. Winter (1705) 2 Salk. 588 646 (Bishop) (1604) Cro. Jac. 53 R. V. Winton 731 R. . Woodham Walter (1869) 100 B. & S. 439 598 N. & M. 712 1 170 R. V. Wroxton (1833) 4 B. & Ad. 640 ; 2 L. J. M. C. 64 R. s. Yarborough (1824) 3 B. & C. 91 2 Bligh (N. S.) 147 I Dow. & Clark, 178 ; 5 Bing. 163 4 Dow. &Ry. 790 27 R. R. 292 778 R, V. Younger (1793) 5 T. R. 449 69 I Race B. Ward (1855) 4 E. & B. 702 3 C. L. R. 744 24 L J. Q- B. 153 Jur. (N. S.) 704 710, 746 Radburn v. Jervis (1841) 3 Beav. 450 992 26 W. R. 417 Radcliffe, Re, (1878) 7 Clj. D. 733 1379 Radcliffe, Re [1892] ii Ch. 227 ; 61 L. J. Ch. ,186 66 L. T. 363 : 40 W. R. 323C. A. 552> 1349 RadclifEe v. Bartholomew [1892] i Q. B. 161 ; 61 L. J. M. C. 63 ; 65 L. T. 71 677; 40W. R. 63; 56J. P. 262
R. R. R.
I'.
; ;
.
....
.
PAGE
.....
; .
. . .
...
; ; ;
....
;
Radley p.^Eglesfield (1671) i Ventr. 174 937 Radley v. L. & N. W. Ry. (1876) L. R. i App. Gas. 754 46 L. J. Ex. 573 ; 35 L.T. 637; 25W. R. 147-H. L. (E.) 333,544 Raffles V. Wichelhaus (1864) 2 H. & C. 906 : 33 L.. J, Ex. 160 . 37 Raggett 0. Findlater (1873) L. R. 17 Eq. 29 43 L. J. Ch. 64 29 L. T. 448 ;
;
. .
22 W. R, 53 1028 Raggi, Be [1913] 2 Ch. 206 ; 82 L. J. Ch. 396 108 L. T. 917 1386 Railton v. Mathews (1844) 10 CI. & F. 934 292 Rainford v. Keith [1905] i Ch. 296 92 L. T. 786 .12 74 L. J. Ch. 531 21 T. L. R. 382 Manson, 278 538 Raitto. Mitchell (1815)4 Camp. 146 16R. R. 765 105,224,968 Raleigh v. Goschen [1898] i Ch. 73 67 L. J. Ch. 59 77 L. T. 429 46 W.R. 9 340 Ralph, Re (1883) 25 Ch. D. 194 53 L. J. Ch. 188 49 L. T. 504 48 J. P. 1029 135 ; 32 W. R. 168 Ramsbottom B. Wallis (1835) 5 L. J. Ch. 92 829 Ramsden v. Dyson (1866) L. R. i H. L. 129 I2 Jur. (N. S.) 506 14 W. R. . . 926 121 Ramsgate Corporation v. Debling (1906) 70 J. P. 132 ; 22 T. L. R. 369 ; 4 L. G. R. 495 680 Ramsgate Hotel Co. v. Montefiore (1866) 4 H. & C. 164 35 L. J. Ex. 90 12 Jur. (N:S.)4S5i 13L. T. 715; 14W. R. 335 88 Randall B. Jenkins (1673) I Mod. 96 . Randall . Scory (1633) Cro. Car. 313 551
;
.
:
'
.......
. .
.751
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Randfield
v.
;
cxci
PAGE
Randfield (i860) 8 H. L. C. 226 30 L. J. Ch. 179 n. ; reversing 1 1 W. R. 1260 847 ; 2 N. R. 309 Rangeley v. Midland Ry. (1868) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 306 37 L. J. Ch. 313 18 L. T. 69 ; 16 W. R. 547 679, 705 Rann v. Hughes (1778) 7 T. R. 350 n. 4 Bro. P. C. 27 92, 1418 Raphael v. Goodman (1838) 8 A. & E. 565 3 Nev. & P. 547 i W. W. & H. 7 L- J- Q- B. 220 363 530 Rapier v. London Tramways Co. [1893] 2 Ch. 588 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 36 2 R. 448; 69 L. T. 631 C. A 345)401 Rapson v. Cubitt (1842) 9 M. & W. 710 ; 1 1 L. J. Ex. 271 6 Jur. 606 354 Rassam v. Budge [1893] i Q. B. 571 5 R. 336 ; 62 L. J. Q. B. 312 68 L. T. 511 717 ; 41 W. R. 377 ; 57 J. P. 361 Ratcliff's Case (1592) 3 Rep. 37 b 1218 Ratcliff V. Davis (1610) Yelv. 178 i Bulstr. 29 956 Ratcliffe, In the Goods oj [1889] P. 1 10 68 L. J. P. 47 80 L. T. 170 1341 Ratcliffe v. Evans [1892] 2 Q. B. 524 66 L. T. 794 40 61 L. J. Q. B. 535 W. R. 578 56 J. P. 837C. A 428 Rattenberry, Re [1906] i Ch. 667 75 L. J. Ch. 304 94 L. T. 475 54 W. R. 1281 311 ; 22 T. L. R. 249 Raulin v. Fischer [191 1] z K. B. 93 80 L. J. K. B. 811 104 L. T. 849 27 T. L. R. 220 323 Ravengao. Mackintosh (1824) 2 B. & C. 693 4 Dow. & Ry. 107 ; i C. & P.
; ; . . .
.
....
;
;
492 Upcott (1869) 20 L. T. 233 406 Rawlings ij. General Trading Co. [1920] 3 K. B. 30 ; 36 T. L. R. 649 ; reversed 37 T. L. R. 252 ; 65 S. J. 220 C. A. 42 Rawlings v. Till (1837) 7 L. J. (N. S.) Ex. 6 432 611,613 Rawlings o. Walker (1826) 5 B. & C. Ill Rawlins v. Vandyke (1801) 3 Esp. 250 57 28 L. J. Ch. 188 Rawlins v. Wickham (1858) 3 De G. & J. 304 5 Jur. (N. S.) 278 ; 7 W. R. 145 541 Rawlinson v. Mort (1905) 93 L. T. 555 21 T. L. R. 774 939 811 Rawlyns' Case (i587)-4 Rep. 52 a /. 36 Raworth o. Marriott (1833) I My. & K. 643 Rawstron o. Taylor (1885) II Exch. 369; 25 L. J. Ex. 33 1350 Ray 0. Ray (1815) Cooper, 264; 14 R. R. 255 82 L. T. 46 Raybould, Re [1900] i Ch. 199 48 W. R. 69 L. J. Ch. 248
204
Ravenhill
......... ............
; ; ; ; ; ; ; .
.
v.
....
. . .
....
. . . . .
-77'
301 Rayer, Re [1903] i Ch. 685 72 L. J. Ch. 230 Rayer v. Strickland (1842) 2 Q. B. 792 Rayment v. Rayment [1910] P. 271 79 L. T. L. R. 634; 54 Sol. Jo. 721
; ;
. .
87 L. T. 712
115
.
51
W.
R. 538
;
1254
558, 585
J. P.
.
103 L. T. 430
. . .
26
.
27 L. T. 506 ; ; 1344 R. 859 353 Rayner v. Mitchell (1879) L. R. 2 C. P. D. 357 25 W. R. 633 Rayner 0. Preston (188 1) 18 Ch. D. i 50 L. J. Ch. 472 44 L. T. 787 ; 29 188, 191, 192 W. R. 546 127 Rayner . Stone (1762) 2 Eden, 128 Rayson v. South London Tramways Co. [1893] 2 Q. B. 304 4 R. 522 62 4871 4^9 42 W. R. 21 69 L. T. 491 L. J. Q. B. 593 I343 Read's Case (1604) 5 Rep. 33 b Read v. Anderson (1882) 10 Q. B. D. 100 (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 779 53 L. J. 237, 240, 241 32 W. R. 950 49 J. P. 4 51 L. T. 55 Q. B. 532 1378 Read 11. Blunt (1832) 5 Sim. 567
Raynerc. Grote(i846) 15 M. & W. 359; 16L. J. Ex. 79. Rayner v. Koehler (1872) L. R. 14 Eq. 262 ; 41 L. J. Ch. 697
20
...
. .
1204 65
W.
Digitized
by Microsoft
CXCll
TABLE OF CASES
Coker (1853) 13 C. B. 850 990 I W. R. 4.13 Edwards (1864) '17 C. B. N.
; ;
Read
s.
Jur.
Read Read
.........
i
C. L. R,
746
22 L. J. C. P. 201
;
17
432
360
v.
S.
245
N. R. 48
34 L.
P. 31 J. C.
II L. T.
v.
3H
'
G. E. Ry. (i868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 555 ; 9 B. & S. 714 ; 37 L. J. Q. B. 278 ; 18 L. T. 82 ; 16 W. R. 1040 363 1:81 Read v. Lega'fd (1851) 6 Exch. 636 ; 20 L. J. Ex. 309 ; 15 Jur. 494 Read 0. Operative Stonemasons [1902] 2 K. B. 732 ; 71 L. J. K. B. 994 87 L. T. 493 ; 51 W. R. 115 ; 66 J. P. 822 479, 480 Reado. Rann (1830) loB. &C.'438; 8 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 144. . 236 Read v. Snell (1743) 2 Atk. 649 580 Reade (Alfred), In the Goods o/[i902] P. 75 ; 71 L. J. P. 45 ; 86 L. T. 258 1253 Readhead v. Mid. Ry. (1869) L. R. 4 Q. B. 379 ; 38 L. J. Q. B. 169 ; 20 L. T.
. ; .
628 17 W. R. 737 Reading v. Menham (1832) i Moo. & Rob. 234 Reason v. Wirdnam (1824) i Car. & P. 434 Reay w. Huntington (1803) 4 East, 271
;
Reddaway
44 Reddel Reddie
v.
Banham
.... .....
65 L. J. Q. B. 381
;
59. 331
195 Z2I
607
1028
[1896] A. C. 199
.
W.
0.
o.
R. 638
3 Jur.
Scoolt (1795) Peake, 240. Rede 0. Farr (1817)6 M. & S. 121 ; 18 R. R. 329 Redgrave v. Hurd (1881) 20 Ch. D. 1 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 113
.
.....
722
;
R. 251 C. A. 38, 126 Taylor (1835) 4 Nev. & M. 469 i H. & W. 15 ; 4 L. J. K. B. 74 434 Reed 0. Nutt (1890)24 Q. B. D. 669 59 L. J. Q. B. 311 ; 62 L. T. 635 38 W. R. 621 54 J. P. 599 438 Reed 0. Royal .Exchange Co. (1796) 2 Peake (Add. Cas.) 70 308 Reedie o. L. & N. W. Ry. (1849) 4 Exch. 244 6 Railw. Cas. 184 ; 20 L. J. Ex. 65 351 Rees V. De Bernardy [1896] 2 Ch. 437 65 L. J. Ch. 656 74 L. T. 585 35, 40, 499 Reese River Silver Mining Co. u. Atwell (1869) L. R. 7 Eq. 347 ; 20 L. T. 163; 17 W. R. 6oi ~ 106^ Reeve v. Lisle [1902] A. C. 461 87 I,. T. 308 51 W. R. 71 L. J. Ch. 768 18 T. L. R. 767 830 576 Reeves Trusts, Re (1877) 4 Ch. D. 841 46 L. J. Ch. 412 36 L. T. 906 1285 25 W. R. 62 Reeves v. Barlow (1884) 12 Q. B. D. 436 53 L. J. Q. B. 192 50 L. T. 782 32 W. R. 672 C. A 949 Reeves o. Capper (1838) 5 Bing. (N. C.) 136 6 Scott, 877 ; i Am. 427 2 Jur. ^ 1067 949 Reid, In the Goods of (1866) L. R. i P. & M. 74 13 L. T. 35 L. J. P. 43 680; 12 Jur. (N. S.) 300; 14 W. R. 316 1245 Reid V. Bickerstaff [1908] 2 Ch. 305 78 L. J. Ch. 753 100 L. T. 952 C. A. 806 Reid V. Shergold (1805) 10 Ves. 370 870 62 L. T. 378 38 W. R. 484 Reilly w. Booth (1850) 44 Ch. D. 12 777 Reis, Re [1904] 2 K. B. 769-; 73 L. J. K. B. 929; 91 L. T. 592; 20 Clough i>. Samuel [1905] A. C. 442 T. L. R. 547 C. A. affirmed 21 T. L. R. 702 1068 74 L. J. K. B. 918 ; 93 L. T, 491 Reis V. Pfiiry (1895) 64 L. Ji Q. B. 566 43 W. R. 648 \ 15 R. 427 514 Renals o. Cowlishaw (1878)9 Ch. D. 125. 802 Rendall v. Andrese (1892) 61 L. J. Q. B. 630 1349, 1366 Reneaux 11. Teakle (1853) 8 Exch. 680 ; 22 L. J. Ex. 241 i 17 Jur. 351 W. R. 312 57
W.
Reece
........
; ; ; ; ;
45 L. T. 485
30
.
v.
...
........ .......
; ; . ; ; ; ; ; ;
.
Rennington
u.
592
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Reuss (Princess
Reuter
Revis
of) v.
cxciii
PAGE
Bos (1871) L. R.
;
H.
L. 176
40 L.
;
J. Ch.
655
24
1014
27
48 L.
49 18 C. B. 126 25 L. J. C. P. 195 ; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 614 R. 506 512 Reynel's Case (1612) 9 Rep. 94 b 742 Reynell v. Champernoon (1631) Cro. Car. 228 701, 720 Reynell v. Sprye (1849) 8 Hare, 222 ; affirmed (i8?2) 21 L. J. Ch. 13, 633 ; iD. M. &G. 660; 15 Jur. 1046 " 543 Reynolds, In the Goods of (1873) L. R. 3 P. & D. 35 ; 42 L. J. P. 20 ; 28 L. T. 144; 21 W. R. 512 1253,1254 Reynolds v. Bridge (1856) 6 El. & Bl. 528 26 L. J. Q. B. 12 ; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 1164; 4 W. R. 640 139 Reynolds . Kennedy (1748) I Wils. 232. 490 Rhoades, Re [1899] ^ Q. B. 347 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 804 80 L. T. 742 47 W. R. 561 15 T. L. R. 407 6 Manson, 277 C. A. .1381, 1383, 1389 Rhodes, i?e(i89o)44Ch. D. 94; 59L. J. Ch. 298; 62L.T. 352C.A. 325 Rhodes v. Bate (1865) L. R. i Ch. App. 252 35 L. J. Ch. 267 ; 12 Jur. (N. S.) 178; 13L. T. 778; 14W. R. 292. 36 Rhodes v. Monies [1895] i Ch. 236 64 L. J. Ch. 122 12 R. 6 71 L. T. 414 599 ; 43 W. R. 99 C. A Rice . Gordon (1848) II Beav. 265 1407 Rice V. Rice (1853) 2 Drew. 73 2 Eq. R. 341 2 W. R. 23 L. J. Ch. 289 139 760, 840 Rice . Wiseman (1615) 3 Bulstr. 82 703 Rich V. Chamberlayne (1752) i Ca. lemp. Lee, 134 1341 Richards . Delbridge (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 11 43 L. J. Ch. 459 ; 22 W. R.' IIOI 584 Richards v. Easto (1846) 15 M. & W. 244 15 L. J. Ex. 163 ; 10 Jur. 695 ; 3 D. & L. 515 776 Richards v. Frankum (1840) 6 M. & W. 420 9 Car. & P. 221 8 D. P. C. 346 ; 9 L. J. Ex. 162 423 Richards o. Hayward (1841) 2 M. & G. 574 2 Scott (N. R.) 670 ; 10 L. J.
i>.
W.
J. C. P.
492
40 L. T. 476
R. 631
Smith (1856)
4W.
.....
. . .
.
......
; ;
.
.....
; ; ;
.:!>> 47,209 Heather (1817) i B. & Aid. 29 . 154 v. Kidderminster (Mayor of) [1896] 2 Ch. 212 ;. 65 L. J. Ch. 502 ; 951, 952 74 L. T. 483 44 W. R. 505 4 Mans. 169 Richards v. Rose (1853) 9 Exch. 218 2 C. L. R. 311 23 L. J. Ex. 3 ; 17
C. P. 108
v.
Richards Richards
.........
.
;
'
...
; ; . .
Jur. 1036 Richards 0. Squibb (1698) I Ld.Raym. 726 Richardson, In the Goods 0/(1871) L. R. 2 P. & Mj 244 40 L. J. P. 36 25 L. T. 384; 19W. R. 979 Richardson, Re [1900] 2 Ch. 778 ; 69 L. J. Ch. 804 Richardson v. Atkinson (1723) i Stra. 576 Richardson v. Barnes (1849) 4 Ex. 128 18 L. J. Ex. 468 Richardson v. Graham [1908] i K. B. 39 77 L. J. K. B. 27 98 L. T. 360
. .
.
......
;
713
,717
....
. .
1339 754
416
.105
C.
673,674,857
v.
Richardson
G. E. Ry. (1876)
C. P. D.
C.
A A
o.
......
; ; ;
342
35 L. T. 351
24
W.
R. 907
.
331 1282
55 L. J. Q. B. 58
9 D. P. C. 715
;
54 L. T. 456
C.
659,751.875
Jackson (1841) 8 M.
Richardson
303
& W.
298
10 L. J. Ex.
^9
Digitized
by Microsoft
cxGiv
TABLE OF CASES
tAGt
v.
;
Kensit (1845) 5 ^- '* ^- 4^5 i' ^ Scott fN. R.) 419 12 L. J. C. P. 154; 7jur. 856 Richardsbn ! ILarigriHge (1811) 4 Taunt. 128 Richardson v. Mellish (1824) 1 1 Moore, 104 ; 3 Bing. 334 4 L. J. (O. S.) C. P.
'
. . . ^ .
Richardson
597 618
123
68
Richardson . Rowntree [1894] A. C. 217 6 R. 95 63 L. J. Q. B. 283 88 70 L. T. 817 ; 58 J. P. 493 ; 7 Asp. M. C. 482H. L. (E.) Richardson v. Smallwood (1822) Jac. 552 1063 Richardsbn . Sydenham (1705) 2 Vern. 447 616 Richardson . Walker (1824) 2 B. & C. 827; 4 Dow. & Ry. (K, B.) 4:98; 2 L.'J. (O. S.) K. B. 180 747 Richardson v. Younge (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 478 40 L. J. Ch. 338 25 L. T. 230 rgW. R. 312 76 Richerson, Re [1892] 1 Ch. 3793 61 L. J. Ch. 202 66 L. T. 174 40 W. R. 233 1358,1359 Richmond v. White (1879) 12 Ch. D. 361 48 L. J. Ch. 798 41 L. T. 570 1381 27 W. R. 878 C. A. Rickards 0. Bartrum (1908) 25 T. L. R. 181 521 Ricket V. Metropolitan Ry. (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 175 36 L. J. Q. B. 205 16 L. T. 542 IS W. R. 937 773 iijur. 918 Ricketts o. Bell (1847)1 Pe G. & Sm. 335 100 Ricketts v. Enfield Churchwardens [1909] i Ch. 544 78 L. J. Ch. 294 L. T. 362 Ridge's Trusts, Re (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 665 41 L. J. Ch. 787 27 L. T. 141 ; 20 W. R. 878 65; Ridjsway, Re (1885) 15 Q. B. D. 447 54 L. J. Q. B. 570 34 W. R. 80 2 Morr. 248 939 Ridgwa'yji. Wharton (1854) 3 De G. M. & G. 677; affirmed {iS^j) 6 H. L. Cas. loi, 238 ; 2 Eq. R. 839 27 L. J. Ch. 46 4 Jur. (N. S.) 173 5 W. R. 804 .-PI102 Ridley, Re [1904] 2 Ch. 774 73 L. J. Ch. 696 91 L. T. 189 1106, 1380 Ridout o. Fowler [1904] 2 Ch. 93 73 L. J. Ch. 579 91 L. T. 509 53 W. R. 42 C. A. 1057 Rigby V. Connol (1880) 49 L. J. Ch. 328 14 Ch. D. 482 ; 42 L. T. 139 28 W. R. 650 127 Rigden o. Vallier (1751) 2 Ves. St. 252 ; 3 Atk. 731 1090, 1093 Rigg V. Lonsdale (Earl of) (1857) J H. & N. 923 26 L. J. Ex. 196 3 Jur. (N. S.)39o; 5W. R. 355 417 Right d. Jefferys j).!Bucknell(i83i) 2 B. & Ad. 278 . Right o. Darley (1786) 1 T. R.I 59 618,619 Riley v. Home (1828) 5 Bing. 217 2 M. & P. 331 260 30 R. R. 576 Rimington o. Hartley (i 880): 14 Ch. D. 630 43 L. "T 15 29 W. R. 42 1232 Ripon (Earl of) . Hobart (1843) 3 Myl. & K. 169 Coop. temp. Brougham,
;
...... ......
; .
.
.'
.189 .628
'
..........
.
.811
. .
"
333 ; 3 L. J. Ch. 145 374 ,' . 1191 Rippingall . Rippingall (1882) 48 L. T. 126 Riseley v. Ryle (1843) 11 M. & W. 16 ; 12 L. J. Ex. 322 . 530 Rising, iJe [1904] i Ch. 533 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 455 ; 90 L. T. 504 B. & S. 409 ; 32 L. J. Q. B. 386 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 202 ; Rist o. Faux (1863) 4 W. R. 918 8 L. T. 737; . . 466,467 River Steamer Co., Re (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App; 822 ; 25 L. T. 319 ; 19 W. R.
. . . . . . . . .
.661
11.30
75
;
48 L.
.
J.
Ex. 47
.
39 L. T. 39
Roach Roach
w.
!).
Garrari (1748)
& M.
487
......
.
....
.
.
;
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Robb
V.
cxcv
PAGE
Green [1895] 2 Q. B. 315 ; 64 L. J. Q. B. 593 ; 14 R. 580 ; 73 L. T. 15 44 W. R. 25 59 J. P. 69S~C. A 210, 427 RobbJns, Re [1907] 2 Ch. 8 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 531 ; 96 L. T. 755 C. A. 995 Roberson v. Rochester Folding Box Co. (1902) 171 N. Y. 538 501
; ;
.
Roberts, In the Goorfxo/[ 1898] P. 149 67 L. J. P. 71 78 L. T. 390 1337 Roberts, Re [1902] 2 Ch. 834 ; 72 L. J. Ch. 38 87 L. T. 523 ; 51 W. R. 89... 1392, 1394, 1398 Roberts v. Brennan [1902] P. 143 71 L. J. P. 74 86 L. T. 599 50 W. R. 18 T. L. R. 467 1204 414; Roberts 0. Brett (1865) 11 H. L. Gas. 337; 34 L. J. C. P. 241 11 Jur. (N. S.)377: 12L. T. 286; 13W. R. 587 47,134,135 Roberts v. Crowe (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 629 41 L. J. C. P. 198 27 L. T. 238 317 Roberts v. Dixwell (1738) i Atk. 607 751 Roberts v. Gray [1913] i K. B. 520 82 L. J. K. B. 362 ; 108 L. T. 232 57 Sol. Jo. 143 ; 29 T. L. R. 149 C. A 21 Roberts v. Gwyfrai District Council [1899] 2 Ch. 608 68 L. J. Ch. 233 ; 80 L.T. 107; 47W. R. 376; 63 J. P. 181 .375 Roberts . Havelock (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 404 224 Roberts v. Holland [1893] i Q. B. 665 ; 62 L. J. Q. B. 21 5 R. 370; 41 W. R. 494 349, 405 Roberts . Macord (1832) I Moo. & R. 230 Roberts o. Roberts (1917) 117 L. T. 157; 61 Sol. Jo. 492'; 33 T. L. R.
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
:
....... ......
. . .
.711
Ex. 82 ; 4 H. & C. 103 35 L. J. Ex. 62 12 Jur. (N. S.) 78 ; 13 L. T. 471 ; 14 W. R. 225 399 Roberts v. Smith (1857) 2 H. & N. 213 26 L. J. Ex. 319 3 Jur. (N. S.) 469 ; 5 W. R. 581 Roberts v. Walker (1830) i Russ. & M. 752 1394 Roberts a. Wyatt (i8io) 2 Taunt. 268 II R. R. 566 . Robertson v. Amazon Tug Co. (1881) 7 Q. B. D. 598 ; 51 L. J. Q. B. 68 ; 46 L. T. 146 30 W. R. 308 4 Asp. M. C. 496 195 Rober^n v. Broadbent (1883) L. R. 8 App. Ca. 812 53 L. J. Ch. 266 ; 50 L. T. 243 ; 32 W. R. 205 1263,1374,1398 608 Robertson v. Gardiner (1852) 12 C. B. 319 Robertson v. Hartopp (1889) 43 Ch. D. 484 9 L- J- Ch. 553 ; 62 L. T. 585 C. A 327, 717 Robertson v. Robertson (1883) 8 P.D. 94; 48 L. T. 590; 31 W. R. 652 1200 C. A. Robins & Co. v. Gray [1895] 2 Q. B. 501 65 L. J. Q. B. 44 73 L. T. 252 245, 247, 964 44 W. R. I 59 J. P. 741 C. A Robinson v. Bousfield (1844) 6 Q. B. 492 590 Robinson 0. Continental Insurance Co. [1915] i K. B. 155 84 L. J. K. B. 238 ; 31B 20 Com. Cas. 125 59 Sol. Jo. 7 31 T. L. R. 20 112 L. T. 125 Robinson t). Cook (181 5) 6 Taunt. 336 ; 16 R. R. 624 Robinson v. Currey (1881) 7 Q. B. D. 465 ; 50 L. J. Q. B. 561 ; 45 L. T. 368 ; 46 J. P. 148 ; 30 W. R. 39 C. A 989 Robinson v. Davison (1871) 40 L. J. Ex. 172 L. R. i Ex. 269 ; 24 L. T. 755 130, 131 19 W. R. 431 Robinson v. Duleep Singh (1878) 11 Ch. D. 798 48 L. J. Ch. 758 39 L. T. 716, 718 27 W. R. 21 313 Robinson o. Geldard (1852) 3 M. & G. 735 reversing 3 De G. & Sm. 499 18 1267 L. J. Ch. 454 i 14 Jur. 143 Robinson c. Greinold (1704) I Salk. 119 57 Robinson -v. Harkin [1896] 2 Ch. 415 65 L. J. Ch. 773 74 L. T. 777 ; 44 1139,1422 W. R. 702
v.
333 Roberts
"9
Rose (1865)
L. R.
i
; ;
.445
.
'
-415
......
;
. . . . .
.108
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
excvi
TABLE OF CASES
. v. v.
18 L. J.
i
Moo.
.
......
Ex. zo2
. .
PAGE
213
1084
.121
; .
& P.
474
.
3 C.
.
&
P. 234
.
6L.
Robinson
J. (0.
o.
W.
Robinson Robinson
544
......
;
61 L. T. 60
37
394
623
44 L.
;
J. C. P.
362
33 L. T.
232
52 L. J. Ch. 440
J. Ch.
;
Robinson
v.
19; 31
Ommanney W. R. 525
49 L. T.
S.)
1246
Robinson
186
v.
Preston (1858) 4 K.
&
De
J.
505
27 L.
395
4 Jur. (N.
1091
ii.
Robinson
Robinson (1851)
. .
/
G. M.
&
;
G. 247
21 L. J. Ch.
in
.
16
.
Jur. 255
Robinson v. Tonge (1735) 3 P. Wms. 398 2 Eq. Cas. Abr. 259, 454 Robinson 11. Walter (1616) 3 Bulstr. 269 Robson, Re [1916] i Ch. 116 ; 85 L. J. Ch. 137 ; 114 L. T. 134 60 Sol. Jo. 222 Robson V. Premier Oil, etc. Co. [1915] 2 Ch. 124 84 L. J. Ch. 629 113
. ; . ; ;
......
A
. .
1122
1375
247
753
L. T. 523 ; 59 Sol. Jo. 475 ; 31 T. L. R. 420 C. Roby, Re [1508] i Ch. 71 ; 77 L. J. Ch. 169 97 L. T. 773 C. A. Roche 11. Roche [1905] P. 142 ; 72 L. J. P. 50 ; 92 L. T. 668 ; 21 T. L. R.
31A
13 10
332 Rochefoucauld 11. Boustead [1898] i Ch. 550 67 L. J. Ch. 427 C. A. Rochester (Bishop) v. Le Fanu [1906] 2 Ch. 513 75 L. J. Ch. 743 95 L. T. 602 22 T. L. R. 800 Roddam o. Morley (1857) i De G. & j; i 26 L. J. Ch. 438 3 Jur. (N. S.) 5 W. R. 510 449 Roddy c. Fitzgerald (1857) 6 H. L. Cas. 823
;
......
,
1192 1124
864
76
.660
.
6 C. B. 427 18 L. J. C. P. i 12 Jur. 921 Parker (1856) 18 C. B. 1 12 25 L. J. C. P. 220 2 Jur. (N. S.) 496<f 4W. R. 545 Rodgers 11. Price {1829) 3 Y. & J. 28 Rodriguez o. Speyer [1919] A. C. 59 88 L. J. K. B. 147 119 L. T. 409 62 Sol. Jo. 765 34 T. L. R. 628H. L. (E.) Roe o. Harvey (1769) 4 Burr. 2487
v.
;
;
Roden
Eyton (1848)
532
533 318
Rodgefs
V.
Nix [1893] P. 55 ; 62 L. J. P. 36 : R. 472 68 L. T. 26 26, 27 11 R. R. 455 d. Bamford o. Hayley (1810) 12 East, 464 1363 Rogers, iJe [1915] 2 Ch. 437 84 L. J. Ch. 837 ; 60 Sol. Jo. 27 1357 Rogers v. Brenton (1847) 10 Q. B. 26 17 L. J. Q. B. 34 ; 12 Jur. 263 744, 745 Rogers v. Challis (1859) 27 Beav. 175; 29 L. J. Ch. 240; 7 W. R.
V.
; ; . . ;
.
o. w.
Hodgson
....... .......
; ; .
.
31A
389
1^532
618
.
710 201 Rogers 0. Goodenough (1862) 2 Sw. & Tr. 342 ; 31 L. J. P. 49 5 L. T. 719 N. S. 391 8Jur. 1253 Rogers v. Hadley (1863) 2 H. & C. 227 32 L. J. Ex. 241 9 Jur. (N. S.) 66 898; 9L. T. 292; iiW. R. 1074 Rogers 0. Hosegood [1900] 2 Ch. 388 ; 69 L. J. Ch. 652 83 L. T. 186 48 W. R. 659; 16 T. L. R. 489 C. A 802 Rogers v. Hull Dock Co. (1865) 34 L. J. Ch. 165 4 N. R. 494 10 Jur. (N. S.) 1245; II L. T. 42, 403 69 Rogers v. Lambert [1891] i Q. B. 318 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 187 ; 64 L. T. 406 39 W.R. 114; 55j-,P-452 233,425
; ; .
.
............
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
CA
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
; 1 ;
cxcvii
PAGE
Rogers v. Spence (1844) 13 M. & W. 571 1 M. & W. 191 15 L. J. Ex. 49 ; (1846)1201. &F. 700 322,326,367 RoUason, Re (1887) 34 Ch. D. 495 56 L. J. Ch. 768 ; 56 L. T. 303 35 W. R. 607 gjg Rolls V. Pearce (1877) 5 Ch. D. 730 46 L. J. Ch. 791 25 36 L. T. 438 W. R. 899 1292 Roll V. Somerville (1737) 2 Eq. Ca. Ab. 759 791 Rooke . Dennis (1586) 2 Leon. 192 698 Roope o. D'Avigdor (1883) 10 Q. B. D. 412 48 L. T. 761 47 J. P. 248 338 Rooper v. Harrison (1855) 2 K. & J. 86 728, 8i6,
; ; ; ; ;
;
817
Roose, Re (1880) 17 Ch. D. 696 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 197 ; 43 L. T. 719 29 W. R. 230 Rooth V. Wilson (1817) i B. & Aid. 59 18 R. R. 431 Roper . Holland (1835) 3 A. & E. 99 4 N. & M. 668 i H. & W. 167 4 L. J. K. B. 156 Roret V. Lewis (1848) 17 L. J. Ex. gg 5 Dow. & L. 371 Roscoe (James) v. Winder [1915] i Ch. 62 84 L. J. Ch. 286 1 12 L. T. 121 H. B. R. 61 59 Sol. Jo. 105 Roscorla v. Thomas (1842) 2 G. & D. 508 ; 3 Q. B. 234 1 1 L. J. Q. B. 214 6 Jur- 929 Rose, Re [1904] 2 Ch. 348 73 L. J. Ch. 726 71 L. T. 254 [1905] i Ch. 91 L. T. 821 ; 11 Mans. 353 C. A. 859, 917, 94 74 L. J. Ch. 22
;
.
.'
1356 921
322 4g5
1
143
94
919,
Rose Rose
Bartlett (1632) Cro. Car. 292 V. Buckett [1901] 2 K. B. 449 ; 70 L. J. K. B. 736 L. t. 670; 17T. L. R. 544; 8 Manson, 259 C.
V.
.......
;
977 1332
366
50
W.
R. 8
84
;
Rose V. Groves (1843) 5 Man. & G. 613 12 L. J. C. P. 251 Dow. & L. 61 ; 6 Scott (N. R.) 645 Rose V. Hyman [191 1] 2 K. B. 234 80 L. J. K. B. ion
;
;
7 Jur. 951
773
104 L. T. 619
;
55 Sol. Jo. 405 22 Cox, C. C. 356 (1911) 103 L. T. 730 75 J. P. 71 55 Sol. Jo. 126 ; 27T. L. R. 132 Rose V. N. E. Ry. (i876).2 Ex! D. 248 ; 46 L. J. Ex. 374 ; 35 L. T. 693 ; 25 . W. R. 205C. A. 10 L. T. 106 ; 10 Rose V. Watson (1864) 10 H. L. C. 672 ; 33 L. J. Ch. 385 Jur. (N. S.) 297 ; 12 W. R. 585 ^. Rosenquist v. Bowring [1908] 2 K. B. 108 ; 77 L. J. K. B. 545 ; 98 L. T. 773 :
;
27 T. L. R. 367
V.
785
Rose
Kempthorne
437
334 840 463 397
558
'
24 T. L. R. 504 Rosewell o. Prior (1701) 2 Salk. 460 Rosher, Re (1884) 26 Ch. D. 801 53 L. J. Ch. 722 ; 51 L. T. 785 ; 32 W. R. 825 Rosher 0. Rosher (1884) 26 Ch. D. 801 51 L. T. 785 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 722 32 W. R. 820 Ross' Trusts, Re (1871) L. R. 13 Eq. 286 41 L. J. Ch. 130 25 L. T. 817 20 W. R. 231 81 L. T. 578 Ross, Re [1900] I Ch. 162 48 W. R. 264 69 L. J. Ch. 192 Ross V. Johnson (1772) 3 Burr. 2825 20 L. T. Ross V. Ross (1869) L. R. I P. & M. 734 38 L. J. P. & M. 49
; ; ;
.......
;
45 1307
991;
420
853
Rossiter
v.
26
W.
.... ......
;
"94
91, loi
39 L. T. 173
1233
231
Dow &
.
CI.
188
Bligh (N.
S.)
165
Digitized
by Microsoft
CXCVlll
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
o.
Rothwell (1825) 2 Sim. & St. 217 1418 Rourke v. White Moss Colliery Co. (1877) 2 C. P. D. 205 46 L. J. C. P. 283 ; 36 L. T. 49 25 W. R. 263 C. A 352 Rouse's Case (1587) Owen, 28 647, 762, 763 Rouse J). Bardin (1790) I H. Bl. 353 706 Routledge v. Grant (1828) i M. & P- 717 4 Bing. 653 3 Car. & P. 267 6 L. J. (0. S.) C. P. 166 29 R. R. 672 89 Rowbotham 0. Wilson (1857) 8 E. & B. 123 3 Jur. (N. S.) 297 27 L. J. Q. B. 61 2 L. T. 642 ; 6 (1861) 8 H. L. Cas. 348 30 L. J. Q. B. 49 Jur. (N. S.) 965 402, 782 Rowe 1). Rowe (1S65) 4 Sw. & Tr. 162 34 L. J. P. D. & A. iii 12 L. T. II Jur. (N. S.) 568 13 W. R. 1048 1 639 179 Rowley v. L. & N. W. Ry. (1873) L. R. 8 Ex. 231 42 L. J. Ex. 153 29 i8b; 21 W. R. 869 L. T. 369 RowUs o. Bebb [1900] 2 Ch. 107 69 L. J. Ch. 562 82 L. T. 633 48 W. R. Rothwell
;
..... .......
; . ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
562 C. A
54 L.
;
35
W.
R.
604C. A
47 L.
.
J.
Ch. 950
52 L. T. 825
49
1383
Roxburghe
30
v.
Cox
Roy,
W. R. 74 C. A Ex parte (1877) 7 W. R. 82
.
17 Ch. D. 520
45 L. T. 225
142
;
Ch. D. 70
.
; .
J.
.
Bky. 36
.
37 L. T. 508
26
965
Royal Aquarium v. Parkinson [1892] i Q. B. 431 61 L. J. Q. B. 409 66 L. T. 513 40 W. R. 450 56 J. P. 404 512, 19, 527 Royal Baking Powder Co. 0. Wright (1900) 18 R. P. C. 95 428 o. G. W. Ry. (1893) i Ch. 427 .Ruabon Co. 62 L. J. Ch. 483 68 L. T. no 2 R. 237 C. A 41 W. R. 418 782
; ; ; ;
. . . .
Great Fingall Consolidated [1906] A. C. 439 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 843 95 L. T. 214; 22 T. L. R. 712 ; 13 Manson, 248 H. L. 353 Ruddington Land, Re [1909] i Ch. 701 78 L. J. Ch. 378 100 L. T. 648 14 Ruding V. Smith (1821) 2 Hagg. Con. 371 1 167 Ruel V. Tatnell (1880) 43 L. T. 507 29 W. R. 172 508 Rumsey v. Walton (1760) 4 T. R. 444 691 Rundle o. Hearle [1898] 2 Q. B. 83 67 L. J. Q. B. 741 78 L. T. 561 14 T. L. R. 440 46 W. R. 619 404 Rundle 0. Rundle (1691) 2 Vern, 252 597 Rushw. LuGas|i9io] i Ch. 437 79 L. J. Ch. 172 loi L. T. 851 54 Sol. Jo, 200 . 790 -Rushforth v. Hadfield (1805) .6 East, 519; (i8o6) 7 East, 224; 8 R. R, 520 260, 962, 963 Rushmere v. Polsue [1906] i Ch. 234, 250 75 L. J. Ch. 79 93 L. T. 823 22 T. L. R. 139 C. A. 54 W. R. 161 [1907] A. C. 121 76 L. J. On. 365; 96 L. T. 510; 23 T. L. R. 362 H. L., 393. 395 Rushworth 0. Taylor (1842) 3 Q. B. .699 3 G. & D. 3 I2 L. J. Q. B. 80" 6 Jur- 945 419 Russell's Case (1537) Dyer, 26 b 502 Russell, In the Goods of (ligo) 15 P. D. in L. J. P. 80 62 L. T, 644 59 1247 Russell, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 698 ; 64 I.. J. Ch. 891 73 L. T. 195 44 W. R. 100 ; 12 R. 499 C. A. 1078 Russell . Austin Fryers (1909) 25 T. L. R. 414 41, 985 Russell V. Clowes (1846) 2 Coll. 648 10 Jur. 732 1328 Russell V. Come (1704) 2 Ld. Raym. 1031 6 Mod. 128 Salk. 119 Holt, 699 464 Russell 0. Jackson (1852) 10 Hare, 204 1 100 Russell V. Ledsam (1845) 14 M. & W. 574 ; 14 L. J, Q. B. 71 353 9 Jur. 557
v.
; ;
Ruben
..... ......
; ;
. . .
...
-
......
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
.....
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Russell Russell Russell
V.
.
cxcix
PAGE
Men
V.
;
213
Russell
. . . (1788) 2 T. R. 667 ; i R. R. 585 40+ Moseley (1822) 3 Brod. & B. 211 290 Russell [1895] P. 315 ; 64 L. J. P. 105 ; 73 L. T. 295 ; 44 W. R. [1897] A. C. 395 ; 66 L. J. P. 122 ; 75 L. T. 249 ; 61 J. P. 756.. .1179,
of
Devon
......
;
1188, 1189
V.
Shenton (1842)
3 Q. B.
458
2 G.
&
D. 573
;
1 1
L. J. Q. B. 289
Jur. 1059
397
45 L. J. Q. B. 249
. . . ;
Rustomjee v. The Queen (1876) i Q. B. D. 487 278 24 W. R. 428 Rutter, Re [1907] 2 Ch. 593 24 T. L. R. 12
; ; ;
34 L. T.
79
.
.
1171
Rutter V. Everett [1895] 2 Ch. 872 73 L. T. 82 44 W. R. 104 ; 13 R. 719 ; 2 Mans. 371 982, 1053 Rutter w. Maclean (1799) 4 Ves. 531 976 Ryall D. RoUe (1749) i Atk. 165 949 .1101 Ryall . Ryall (1739) i Atk. 59 Ryan v. Clark (1849) Q. B. 65 13 Jur. 7 D. & L. 8 ; 18 L. J. Q. B. 267 1000 381, 384, 612 Ryano. Mutual Tontine Association [1893] I Ch. 116; 2R. 156; 62 L. J. Ch. 125, 126 252 67 L. T. 820 41 W. R. 146 C. A. Ryan v. Sams (1848) 12 Q. B. 400 ; 17 L. J. Q. B. 271 ; 12 Jur. 745 57 Ryder, In the Goods of {1S61) 2 Sw. & Tr. 127 ; 31 L. J. P. 215 3 L. T. 756 1330 7 Jur. (N. S.)i96 Ryder v. Wombwell (1868) L. R. 4 Ex. 32 38 L. J. Ex. 8 ; 19 L. T. 491 ; 22 17 W. R. 167 Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) L. R. 3 H. L. 330 37 L. J. Ex. 161 ; 19 L. T. 220 406, 453 Rymer, Re [1895] i Ch. 19 64 L. J. Ch. 86 71 L. T. 590 ; 43 W. R. 87 ; 12 1112 R. 112 C. A Rymer v. Mcllroy [1897] i Ch. 528 66 L. J. Ch. 336 ; 76 L. T. 115 ; 45 W. R. 41 1 672
;
........
. .
. . .
....
;
....
;
S. S. B.,
Re
[1906]
Ch. 712
75 L. J. Ch. 522
;
94 L. T. 599
.
54
.
W. R. 429
.
22 T. L. R. 461
S. V. S. [1907]
887, 917
;
P. 224
!).
JacksOn (1903) 20 R. P. C. 6u Sacheverill 0. Porter (1637) Cro. Car. 482 Sadgrove v. Hole [1901] 2 K. B. i 70 L. J. K. B. 455 W. R. 473 Sadgrove v. Kirkby (1795) 6 T. R. 483 3 R. R. 239 Sadler v. G. W. Ry. [1896] A. C. 450 65 L. J. Q. B. 462
Saccharin Co.
;
76 L. J. P. 118
23 T. L. R. 460
84 L. T. 647
. . .
49
505, 507
.
398
74 L. T. 561
;
45
W.
Sadler
v.
R.
51-H.
L. (E.)
337
;
Worley [1894] 2 Ch. 170 70 L. T. 494 42 W. R. 476 8 R. 194 Sadler's Co. /. Badcock (i74J) 2 Atk. 554 70 L. J. K. B. 145 83 L. T. 394 49 Saffery v. Mayer [1901] i K. B. 11
; ; ; ;
loii 305
St.
312
8
Beav. 354
14 L. J. Ch. 247
;
9 Jur.
79 24 L. T.
1
St.
Germans
(Earl)
o.
St.
St.
St.
839 Tipping (1865) 1 1 H. L. C. 642 ; 35 L. J. Q. B. 66 ; II Jur. (N. S.) 785 ; 12 L. T. 776 ; 13 W. R. 1083 393, 395 Mary Newington v. Jacobs (1871) L. R. 7 Q..B. 47 41 L. J. M. C. 72 25 20 W. R. 249 L. T. 800 773 Thomas's Hospital v. Richardson [1910] i K. B. 271 ; 79 L. J. K. B. 1138 17 Manson, 129 C. A 488; loi L. T. 771
. .
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
cc
TAteLE OF CASES
PAGE
137, 138
;
Sainter v. Ferguson (1849) 7 C. B. 716 ; 18 L. J. C. P. 217 ; 13 Jur. 828 Saker, In the Estate of [1909] P. 233 ; 78 L. J. P. 85 ; loi L. T. 400
Sol. Jo.
53
.
562
Ch. 419 ; 96 L. T. 809 . . 1412 Sale o. Kitchingham (1713) 10 Mod. 158 1363 Salford Corporation v. Lever [1891] i Q. B. 168 ; 60 L. J. Q. B. 39 ; 63 L. T. 658 ; 39<W. R. 85 ; 55 J. P. 244 235 Salisbury (Marquis) v. Gladstone (i86cJ) 6 H. & N. 123 ; (1861) 9 H. L. C. C. P. 222; 4L.T. 849; 8 Jur. (N. S.) 625 ; 9 W. R. 930. ..586, 718 692; 34 L.J. Salmon. Re (1889) 42 Ch. D. 351 ; 61 L. T. 146 ; 38 W. R. 15c C. A. 1122 Salmon', Re [1903] i K. B. 147 ; 72 L. J. K. B. 125 ; 87 L. T."654 ; 51 W. R. 288 ; 10 Mans. 22 832, 959 Salmon ^i. Swann (1621) Cro. Jac. 619 611 Salomans 0. Pender (1S65) 3 H. & C. 639 ; 34 L. J. Ex. 95 ; 11 Jur. (N. S.) 236 432; 12 L. T. 267; 13 W. R. 637 Salomons, Re [1920] i Ch. 290 ; 89 L. J. Ch. 222 ; 122 L. T. 670 : 64 Sol. Jo. 241 : 36 T. L. R. 212 1234 Salt, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 203 64 L. J. Ch. 494; 43 W. R. 500; 13 R. 499... 1392,
;
76 L.
J.
......
. .
1340
1394, 1398; 1399 (Marquis) Northampton [1892] A. C. i ; 61 L. J. Ch. 49 ; 65 L. T. W. R. 529 765; 40 33,49,815 Saltern . Saltern (1742) 2 Atk. 376 578 Salters Co. v. Jay (1842) 3 Q. B. 109 ; 2 Gale & Dav. 414 ; 11 L. J. Q. B. 173 ; 6 Jur. 803 857 Salts V. Battersby [1910] 2 K. B. 155 ; 79 L. J. K. B. 937 ; 102 L. T. 730 . 622 Salt Union v. Brunner Mond [1906] 2 K. B. 'B22 ; 76 L. J. K. B. 55 ; 95 L. T. 647; 22T. L. R. 83s 403,783 Sampson, Re [1906] i Ch. 435 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 302 ; 94 L. T. 241 ; 54 W. R.
Salt
V.
342
Sampson v. Pattison (1842) 1 Hare, 533 Sampson and Wall, Re (1884) 25 Ch. D. 482
.
....
;
.1107
837
;
32
W.
R.
617C. A
;
53 L. J. Ch. 457
;
50 L. T. 435
76 L. J. Ch. 21
;
Samuel
Jarrah Corporation [1904} A. C. 323 20 T. L. R. 536 11 Mans. 276 52 W. R. 673 Sandbrook, Re [191-2] 2 Ch. 471 81 L. J. Ch. 800 107 L. T. 148
0.
;
95 L. T. 633
900,1218
C. A.
731
1013
56
1217
; .
.
Rushton (1891) 61 L. J. Ch. 136 66 L. T. 180 Sandei-sii. Maclean (1883) II Q. B.D. 327; 52 L. J. Q. B. 481 31 W. R. 698 5 Asp. M. L. C. 160 C. A. Sanders . Teapc (1884)51 L. T. 263; 48 J. P. 757
.Sandeman
0.
;
.
740
;
'
49L.T.462;
.
.943 .360
.
Sanders-Clerk o. Grosvenor Mansions Co. [1900] 2 Ch.'373 ; 69 L. J. Ch. 579 ; . 48 W. R. 570; 82L. T. 758; 16T. L. R. 428 . . . Sanderson, Re [1912] W. N. 54 ; 106 L. T. 26 ; 56 Sol. Jo. 291 v. Aston (1873) L. R. 8 Ex. 73 ; 42 L. Sandersori J. Ex. 64 ; 28 L. T. 35 ; 21
. .
W.R.
293
v.
Sanderson
Collins [1904]
52 W. R. 354 ; 196,353 Sandilands, Ex parte (1852) 21 L. J. Q. B. 342 ; 17 Jur. 317 ; sub nom. R. v. Leggatt, 18 Q. B. 781 . . , . 471,1181 Sands to Thompson (1885) 22 Ch. D. 614 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 406 ; 48 L. T. 210 ; 31 W. R. 397 643 Saner v. Bilton (1878) 7 Ch. D. 815 ; 47 L. J. Ch. 267 ; 38 L. T. 281 ; 26
.'
. . .
K. B. 628 20 T. L. R. 249
i
73 L. J. K. B. 358
go L. T. 243
W.R.
394
787
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Santley
v.
; ; ;
cci
PAGE Wild [1899] 2 Ch. 474. 68 L. J. Ch. 681 81 L. T. 393 48 W. R. 90; 15T. L. R. 528 C. A 815,831 Sarch . Blackburn (1830) 4 C. & P. 297 Mood. & M. 505 446 Sard V. Rhodes (1836) 4 D. P. C. 743 ; i M. & W. 153 i Gale, 376; 5
;
. . ;
L. J. Ex. 91
Sargent,
(1873) L. R. 17 Eq. 273 ; 43 L. J. Ch. 42? ; 22 W. R. 815 Sari, Re [1892] 2 Q. B. 591 ; 67 L. T. 597 ; 9 Morr. 263 Sarpy v. Holland [1908] i Ch. 443 Saunders' Case (1599) 5 Co. Rep. 12 a . . . Saunders (Daniel), In the Goods 0/(1865) L. R. i P. & M. 16 ; 35 L. J. P. 26 ; 13 L. T. 411 ; II Jur. (N. S.) 1027 ; 14 W. R. 148 . . Saunders f. Edwards (1662) Sid. 95 ; T. Raym. 61 ; i Keb. 389
. . . . . . . .
Ex pane
.... ........
; . . . . . .
426
1268 1244 523
Saunders
v. Evans (1861) 8 H. L. C. 721 ; 31 L. 5 L. T. 129 ; 7 J. Ch. 233 . . Jur. (N. S.) 1293 ; 9 W. R. 501 Saunders v. Marwood (1599) 5 Rep. 12 a . . . . Saunders v. Mills (1829) 6 Bing. 213 ; 3 Moo. & P. 520 ; 8 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 24 Saunders D./Musgrave (1827) 6 B. & C. 524 ; 9 Dow. cS; Ry. 520 ; 5 L-
.873
790 522
J.
.
643 Saunders v. Newman (1817) i B. & Aid. 258 19 R. R. 312 710 Saunders v. Saunders (1858) i Sw. & Tr. 72 ; 4 Jur. (N. S.) 147 6 W. R. 1201 328 Saunders o. Wakefield (1821) 4 B. & Aid. 595 23 R. R. 409 Saunders-Davies, Re (1887) 34 Ch. D. 482 ; 56 L. J. Ch. 492 56 L. T. 153 35 W. R. 493 1392, 1400 Saunderson & Co. 0. Clark (1913) 29 T. L. R. 579 1071 Saunderson . Jackson (1800) 2 Bos. & P. 238 3 Esp. 180 5 R. R. 580 loi Savacool v. Boughton (1830) 5 Wend. (New York), 170 343 Savery v. King (1856) 5 H. L. C. 655 25 L. J. Ch. 482 2 Jur. (N. S.) 503 ; " 34 4 W. R. 571 Savil 11. Savil (1727) 11 Vin. Ab. 154 563 Carth. 416; 12 Mod. Rep. 208 Savile o. Roberts (1698) I Salk. 13 Holt, 150 487, 488 Savin . Burchard (1801)4 Esp. 53 962 Savill Bros. v. Bethell [1902] 2 Ch. 523 71 L. J. Ch. 652 ; 87 L. T. 191 50 W. R. 580C. A Saxby 0. Easterbrook (1878) 3 C. P. D. 339 27 W. R. 188 Saxby v. Fulton [1909] 2 K. B. 208 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 781 loi L. T. 179 53 Sol. Jo. 397 ; 25 T. L. R. 446 C. A 312 Saxby 0. Manchester & Sheffield Ry. (1869) L. R. 4 C. P. 198 38 L. J. C. P. 153; 19L. T. 640; 17W. R. 293 397 Saxlehner v. AppoUinaris Co. [1897] i Ch. 893 66 L. J. Ch. 533 76 L. T. 617 378, 1029 Saxton V. Saxton (1879) 13 Ch. D. 359 49 L. J. Ch. 128 41 L. T. 649; 28 W. R. 294 1251 608 Say 0. Smith (i 561) Plowd. 269 51 L. T. 723 Sayers o. CoUyer (1884) 28 Ch. D. 103 ; 54 L. J. Ch. i 49 33 W. R. 91 C. A 377, 804, 806 J. P. 244 Scaife v. Farrant (1875) L. R. 10 Ex. 358 44 L. J. Ex. 234 33 L. T. 278 252 23 W. R. 840 1400 Scales V. Collins (1852) 9 Hare, 656 Scales 0. Key (1840) II A. & E. 819; 3 P. & D. 505 Scanlan, Re (1888) 40 Ch. D. 200; 57 L. J. Ch. 718; 59 L. T. 599; 36 1228 W. R. 842 Scarborough v. Cosgrove [1905] 2 K. B. 805 74 L. J. K. B. 892 93 L. T. 204 530 54 W, R, 100 21 T. L. R. 754
;
.
.
30 R. R. 414
'
.101
;
.....
; ;
. > . . .
'
.813 .501
'
.746
.,.,..
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccii
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
V.
Scarf
51 L. J. Q. B. 612
i
47 L. T. 258
30
Scarfe
W. R. 893 H.
0.
L. (E.)
144
;
Morgan
(1838) 4
M. & W. 270
H.
&
H. 292
7 L. J. Ex. 324
2 Jur. 569 69, 223, 964, 965, 967 Scarsdale (Lord) v. Curzon (1859) i J. & H. 40 ; 29 L. J. Ch. 249 ; 6 Jur. (N,S.).ig9 928 Scattergood v. Sylvester (18^50) 15 Q. B. ;o6 ; 19 L. J. Q. B. 447 14 Jur. 977 947
697) i Salk. 229 SchafFenius v. Goldberg [1916I i K. B. 284 ; 85 L. J. K. B. 374 ; 113 L. T. 949; 60 Sol. Jo. 105 ; 32T;L. R. 133 C. Schibsby v. Westenholz (1870) L. R. 6 Q. B. 155 ; 40 L. J. Q. B. 73 ; 24
v.
(i
Scatterwood
Edge
.......
;
664 31B
L. T. 93 19 W. R. 587 323 i Marsh, 500 Schmaling o. Thomlinson (1815) 6 Taunt. 147 103,230 Schmalz v. Avery (1851) 20 L. J. Q. B. 228 15 Jur. 291 65 loi Schneider . Norris (1814) 2 M. & S. 286 15 R. R. 825 Schofield J). Orrell Colliery Co. [1909] A. C. 433 78 L. J. K. B. 677 loo L. T. . 462 786; 53 Sol. Jo. 518; 25 T. L. R. 5,69 Scholefield 0. Templer (1859) 4 De G. & J. 433 7 W. R. 653 34 1266 Schweder, Re [1891] 3 Ch. 44 60 L. J. Ch. 656 65 L. T. 64 39 W. R. 588 Scobie *. Collins (r895) ' Q. B. 375 64 L. J. Q. B. 10 71 L. T. 775 15 R. 6 644 Scotland o. South African Territories (1917)33 T. L. R. 255. 31B Scott, Re [1891] 1 Ch. 298 60 L. J. Ch. 461 63 L. T. 800 39 W. R. 264 24 Scott, iJf [1901] 1 K. B. 228 83 L. T. 613 70 L. J. K. B. 66 65 J. P. 1287 84; 49 W. R. 178 17 T. L. R. 148^C. A Scott, Re [1903] I Ch. I 72 L. J. Ch. 20; 87 L. T. 574; 51 W. R. 182 1282 C. A no Scotto. Bevan(l83i>2B. &Ad: 78; 9L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 152 Scott . Brown (1885) 51 L. T. 746 82 61 L. J. Q. B. 738 Scott V. Brown [1892] 2 Q. B. 724 67 L. T. 782 41 W. R. 116; 57 J. P. 213 41,42 Scott o. Cumberland (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 578 31 L. T. 44 L. J. Ch. 226 26; 22 W. R. 840 1392 Scott V. Jones (1835) 4 CI. & Fin. 382 ; 7 L. J. Ch. 242 1386 Scott V. Littledale (1858) 8 E. & B. 815 27 L. J. Q. B. 201 4 Jur. (N. S.) 849 38 Scott 0, London Dock Co. (1865) 3 H. & C. 601 1 1 Jur. 34 L. J. Ex. 220 (N. S.)204i 13 L. T. 148 13 W. R. 410 330 Scott V. Morlev (1887) 20 Q. B. D. 120 57 L. J. Q. B. 43 54 L. T. 919 36 W. R. 67'; 4 Morrell, 286 52 J. P. 230 C. A. 348 Scott V. N. S. P. C. C. (1909) 25 T. L. R. 789 496, 498, 499 Scott o. Sampson (1882) 8 Q. B. D. 491 51 L. J. Q. B. 380 46 L. T. 412 30 W. R. 541 ; 46 J. P. 408 521,522 Scott B. Scott [1913] A. C. 417 ; 82 L. J. P. 74 109 L. T. i 29 T. L. R. 520; 57 Sol. Jo. 498 1176 Scott . Sebright (1886) 12 P. D. 21 56 L. J. P. 11 57 L. T. 421 35 W. R. 258 1175 Scott o. Shepherd (1773) 2 W. Bl. 89Z 3 Wils. 403 433, 439, 446, 544 Scott o. Stansfield (1868) L. R. 3 Ex. 220 L. J. Ex. 155 ; 18 L. T. 572 ; 37 16W. R. 911 342,512 Scott . Tyler (1788) 2 Dick. 712 Bro. C. C. 431 2 1406,1407 Brown (1825) 4 B. & C. 485 ; 6 Dow. & Ry. K. B. 536 ; 28 R. R. Scratton v. 344 . Scriven Bros. *. Hindley [1913] 3 K. B. 564 ; 83 L. J. K. B. 40 109 L. T. 526 38
;
; .
...
. . .
; ;
.........
.
;,
....
. .
,...,..,,...
-719
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Seabrook, i?e[i9ii]
I
cciii
PAGE
Ch. 151 ; 80 L. J. Ch. 61 ; 103 L. T. 587 . 869 Seagram v. Knight (1867) L. R. 2 Ch. App. 628 . 576, 667, 786 Sealey v. Tandy [1902] i K. B. 296 71 L. J. K. B. 4r ; 85 L. T. 459 ; 50 W. R. 347 ; 66]. F, 19 ; 20 Cox, C. C. 57 435
..
.
.....
. .
46 L. J. C. P. 128 25 W. R. 159 51Z Scare . Prentice (1807) 8 East, 348 331 Searle, Re [1912] 2 Ch. 365 81 L. J. Ch. 751 106 L. T. 1005 56 Sol. Jo. 613 1360 Searle v. Cooke (1890) 43 Ch. D. 519 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 259 62 L. T. 221 593, 606 Searle v. Lane (i688) 2 Vern. 88 i Eq. Cas. Abr. 332 1375 Searle v. Lindsay (1861) C. B. N. S. 429 ; 31 L. J. C, P. 106 8 Jur. (N. S.) 746 ; 5 I,. T. 427 ; 10 W. R. 89 449 Searles t). Sadgrove (1855) 5 El. & Bl. 639; 25 L. J. Q. B. 15; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 21 ; 4.W. R. 53 109 Searles v. Scarlett [1892] 2 Q. B. 56 61 L. J. Q. B. 573 66 L. T. 837 40 W. R. 696; 56J. P. 789 515 Seaton v. Heath [1899] i Q. B. 782 68 L. J. Q. B. 631 80 L. T. 579 47 .' W. R. 487 Secretary of State v. Wynne [1905] 2 K. B. 845 75 L. J. K. B. 25 93 L. T. 797 22 T. L. R. 8 50 W. R. 235 972 Seddon v. Bank of Bolton (1882) 19 Ch. D. 462 51 L. J. Ch. 542 46 L. T. 30 W. R. 362 225 853 Seddon v. N. E. Salt Co. [1905] i Ch. 326 74 L. J. Ch. 199 91 L. T. 793 5-! W. R. 232 21 T. L. R. u8 38 Seddon . Smith (1877) 36 L. T. 168 C. A 777 Sedgwick v. Watford, etc. Ry. (1867) 36 L. J. Ch. 379 840 Seear v. Lawson (1880) 15 Ch. D. 426 28 49 L. J. Bky. 69 42 L. T. 893 W. R. 929 C. 365, 499 Sefton (Earl), i?e [1898] 2 Ch. 378 67 L. J. Ch. 518 78 L. T. 765 47 1281 W. R. 49; 14 T. L. R. 466 C. A Selby V. Alston (1797) 3 Ves. 336 753 Selby V. Greaves (1868) L. R. 3 C. P. 594 37 L. J. C. P. 251 ; 19 L. T. 186 ; 621 16 W. R. H27 12 L. J. Ch. 249 26 Selby V. Jackson (1843) 6 Beav. 192 Selby V. Nettlefold (1873) L. R. 9 Ch. App. 1 1 1 43 L. J. Ch. 359 ; 29 L. T. 'I 661 ; 22 W. R. 142 709 817, 834 Selby V. Pomfret (i86i) 3 De G. F. & J. 595 86 L. J. Ch. 353 ; W. C. Seligman v. Eagle Insurance Co. [1917] i Ch. 519
; ; ;
;
434,436 35 L. T. 784
....
; ; :
-305
....
; ;
....... ....
; ;
.
,
.;
&L
Sellen
v.
Rep. 175
ii6L. T. 146
;
31B
Seller v.
Norman
R.
5
208, 213
28 L. J. P.
&
M. 99
5 Jur.
686
1
8W.
Sellon
Selous,
V.
Re [1901] i Ch. 921 49 W. R. 440 553, 753 385. 971 Semayne's Case (1604) 5 Co. Rep. 91a 419 Seton V. Lafone (1887) 19 Q. B. D. 68 4^,191 Setono. Slade ('1802) 7 Ves. 274; 6 R. R. 124 48 L. J. Ch. 513 Sevenoaks Ry. v. L. C. & D. Ry. (1879) n Ch. D. 625 608 27 W. R. 672 40 L. T. 545 78 L. J. Ch. 432 ; 100 L. T. 883 ; 16 Manson, Sewell, Re [1909] i Ch. 806 1133,1146 113 Sewell V. Burdick (1884) L. R. 10 App. Ca. 74 54 L. J. Q. B. 156 52 L. T. 944, 955, 9^3 33 W. R. ^61 ; 5 Asp. M. L, Q, 376 445
; .
. .
194 1267
...
Digitized
by Microsoft
CCIV
TABLE OF CASES
V.
; ;
National Telephone Co. [1907] i K. B. 557 76 L. J. K. B. 196 gf 44 23 T. L. R. 226 Sewers (Commissioners of) v. Glasse (1874) L. R. 19 Eq. 134 44 L. J. Ch 675 129; 31L. T. 495; 23 W. R. 102 Seymor's (Edward) Case (1612) 10 Rep. 97 b, 98 a 560, 565, 579 Seymore B. Tresilian (1737) 3 Atk. 358 '. 934 Seymour v. Pickett [1905] i K. B. 715 74 L. J. K. B. 413 92 L. T. 519 ; 21 T. L. R. 302 C. A 114 Shackello. Rosie'r(i836) 2 Bing. N. C. 634 3 Scott, 59 5 L. J. C. P. 193 4) 324> 56 Shadwello. Hutchinson (1829) Moo. & Malk. 350; 3 B. & Ad. 97; 4 Car. & P. 333 9 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. i4i 396 1264 Shaftesbury . Shaftesbury (1716) 2 Vern. 748 Shafto V. Butler (1871) 40 L. J. Ch. 308 24 L. T. 412; 19 W. R. 595 45 Shallcross v. Oldham (1862) 2 John. & H. 609; 5 L. T. 824; 10 W. R. 291 23 s
Sewell
L. T. 483
;
.
Shannon
Shardlow
30 Sharer,
v. v.
Shannon (1864)
'
Sch.
&
Lef. 324
;
.....
;
413
lOI R. 143 . 1092 (1912) 57 Sol. Jo. 60 Sharland . Mildon (1846) 5 Ha. 469 ; 15 L. J. Ch. 434 ; 10 Jur. 771 1343 Sharpw. Lush (1879) 10 Ch.D. 468; 48 L. J. Ch. 231 ;27W. R. 528.. .1271, 1402, 1415 L. T. 436 ; Sharp V. Powell (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 253 ; 41 L. J. C. P. 95 ; 26
W.
Re
.......
.
20 Ch. D. 90
45 L. T. 572
20W.R.
Sharp Sharp
V.
78 L. J. Ch. 29 833 99 L. T. 916 26 0. St. Sauveur (1871) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 343 41 L. J. Ch. 576 L. T. 142 20 W. R. 269 31 Sharp o. Sfcues (1909) 25 T. L. R. 336 C. A. 55 20 L. T. 41 Sharpe v. Crispin (1869) L. R. i P. & D. 618 38 L. J. P. 17 17 W. R. 368 4 Sharpe v. Durrant (1911) 55 Sol. Jo. 423 C. A. 1076 affirmed, [1911] W. N. Sharpington v. Fulham Guardians {1904] 2 Ch. 449 68 73 L. J. Ch. 777 20 T. L. R. 643 52 W. R. 617 91 L. T. 739 74, 985 J. P. 510 Sharrod v. L. & N. W. Ry. (1849) 4 Exch. 580 6 Rail. Cas. 239 7 D. & L 20 L. J. Ex. 185 ; 14 Jur. 23 213 407 Shaw V. Benson (1883) II Q. B. D. 563 52 L. J. Q. B. 575 266 1118 Shaw V. Cates [1909] i Ch. 389 78 L. J. Ch. 226 Shaw V. Crompton [1910] 2 K. B. 370 80 L. J. K. B. 52 103 L. T. 501 843 Shaw 1). Gould (1868) L. R. 3 H. L. 55 37 L. J. Ch. 433 ; 18 L. T. 833 1204 Shaw V. G. W. Ry. [1894] r Q. B. '373 70 L. T. 218 42 W. R. 285 58
i
.
,
327
; ; ; ;
Ch. log
....
; ;
;
:
J-P-3I8 55, 257, i6o Shaw V. Jersey (E. of) (1879) 4 C. P. D. 120, 359 28 W. R. 142 C. A. 533 Shaw V. Neale (1858) 6 H. L. C. 581 27 L. J. Ch. 444 4 Jur. (N. S.) 695
;
.
R. 635 960 Shaw V. Port Philip Co. (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 103 50 53 L. J. Q. B. 369 L. T. 685 32 W. R. 771 55 Shaw V. Shaw (1788) Vern. & Scr. 607 1232 Shaw f. Thompson (1595) 4 Rep. 30 b 1319 Shee V. French (1857) 3 Drew. 716 ; 26 L. J. Ch. 317 137 3 Jur. (N. S.) 428 Sheehan v. G. E. Ry. (1880) 16 Ch. D. 59 50 L. J. Ch. 68 43 L. T. 432 ; 29 W. R. 69 349, 1085 Sheers v. Brooks (1792) 2 H. Bl. 120 441 Sheffield, &c. Bdg. Soc. u. Aizlewood (1889) 44 Ch. D. 412 59 L. J. Ch. 34 62L. T. 678 1127 Sheffield Corporation 0. Barclay [1905] A. C. 392 74 L. J. K. B. 747 ;' 21 T. L. R. 642 10 Com. Cas. 93 L. T. 83 ; 54 W. R. 49 69 J. P. 385 287; 12 Manson, 248 ; 3 L, G. R. 992 H. L 324,337
6
;
W.
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
ccv
PAGE
Shelfer v. City of London Electric Light Co., &c. [1895] 1 Ch. 287; 64 L. J. Ch. 216 ; 72 L. T. 34 ; 12 R. 1 12 ; 43 W. R. 238 C. A. 377, 378, 396, 401 Shelley's Case (1581) i Rep. 219; i And. 69; Moore, K. B. 136; Jenk.
.
249 659, 660, 661 Shelley v. Westbrook (18 17) Jac. 266 ; 23 R. R. 47 1220 Shelmerdine, Re (1864) 33 L. J. Ch. 474; 11 L. T. 106 25 Shelton v. Shelton (1869) 38 L. J. P. & M. 34 ; 20 L. T. 232 1191 17 W. R. 401 Shelton I'. Springett (1851) II C. B. 452 57 Shephard,7?e(i889)43Ch. D. 131 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 83 ; 62 L. T. 337; 38 W. R. 133 1057 Shepheard v. Bray [1906] 2 Ch. 235 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 633 ; 54 W. R. 556 ; 95 L. T. 414; 22 T. L. R. 625 ; 13 Manson, 279 325 Shepheard o. Whitaker (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 502 ; 32 L. T. 402. ..505, 506, 507, 525 Shepherd v. Bristol & Exeter Ry. (1868) L. R. 3 Ex. 189 ; 37 L. J. Ex. 113 ; 18 L. T. 528 ; 16 W. R. 982 251 Sheppard, Re [1897] 2 Ch. 67 ; 66 L. J. Ch. 445 ; 76 L. T. 756 ; 45 W. R.
.
...... .....
;
....
. . .
'3=4, 1312 Ch. 50; 80 L. J. Ch. 52: 103 L. T. 424; 55 Sol. Jo. 13 . 11 14 Sheppard v. Kent (1702) 2 Vern. 435 ; Pre. Ch. 190 1374 Sherrard v. Harborough (Lord) (1753) Ambl. 165 728 Shewen v. Vanderhorst (1831) i Russ. & My. 347 ; i L. J. (O. S.) Ch., 107 . 1383 . . Shields, Re [1912] i Ch. 591 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 370 ; 106 L. T. 748 1284 Shields v. Atkins (1747) 3 Atk. 56 560 . Shiells V. Blackburne (1789) i Hy. Bl. 158 ; 2 R. R. 750 . 230, 331 Shilling V. Accidental Death Insurance Co. (1857) 2 H. & N. 42 ; 26 L. J. Ex.
.... .....
.
308 5 W. R. 567 126 Stratton (1785) I Bro. C. C. 440 Shoplane v. Roydler (1605) Cro. Jac. 98 585, 901 1088 Shore (Lady) v. Billingsley (1687) i Vern. 482 Shrager v. March [1908] A. C. 402 ; 77 L. J. P. C. 105 ; 99 L. T. 33 ; 24 1068 T. L. R. 641 ; 52 Sol. Jo. 580 647 Shrewsbury's (Countess of) Case (1600) 5 Rep. 13 b Shrewsbury's (Earl of) Case (1610) 9 Rep. 46 b ; 2 Brownl. 330; 4 Lane, 243 ; Yel. 208 743 Shropshire Ry. v. Reg. (1875) L. R. 7 H. L. 496 ; 45 L. J. Q. B. 31 ; 32 L. T. 761 W. R. 709 283 ; 23 . Shrubb,iJ[i9io]W.N. 143; 45 L.J.N. C. 390; 129 L. T.Jo. 182 667 137 Shuttleworth . Clews [1910] i Ch. 176 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 121 ; loi L. T. 708 .
266
Shirley
.....
Garnet (1687) 3 Mod. 240 324, 591 Le Fleming (1865) 19 C. B. N. S. 687 34 L. J. C. P. 309; II Jur. (N. S.)840; 14W. R. 13 719,853,858 8 Jur. (N. S.) 275 ; 5 L. T. Sichel V. Mosenthal (1862) 31 L. J. Ch. 386 201 784 ; 10 W. R. 283 68 L. J. P. 114 81 L. T. 495 ; 48 W. R. Sickert v. Sickert [1899] P. 278 471, "89 268 15 T. L. R. 506 Sidebotham z. Holland [1895] i Q. B. 378 64 L. J. Q. B. 200 72 L. T. 62 ; 615 43 W. R. 228 ; 14 R. 135 Sidney, Re [1908] i Ch. 488 77 L. J. Ch. 296 ; 98 L. T. 625 24 T. L. R. 296
Shuttleworth Shuttleworth
v. 0.
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
1099 52 Sol. Jo. 262 C. 102 Sievewright v. Archibald (1851) 1-7 Q. B. 103 20 L. J. Q. B. 529 15 Jur. 947 3 C. L. R. 1209; 24 L. J. Q. B. 305 Siggers v. Evans (1855) 5 E. & B. 367 939i 94 I Jur. (N. S.) 851 . 1125 Silkstone Co. o. Edey [1900] I Ch. 167; 69L. J. Ch. 73; 48 W. R. 137 3 Silvester, Re [1895] i Ch. 573 ; 64 L. J. Ch. 390 72 L. T. 283 ; 43 W. R. 443 102 Simmons v. Heath Laundry [1910] i K. B. 543 79 L. J. K. B. 395 458 L. T. 210; 26T. L. R. 326^C. A. .
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccvi
TABLE OF CASES
fAGE
c.
Lillystone (1853) 8 Exch. 431 ; 22 L. J. Ex. 217 ; 1 W. R. 198 416 Simmons 0. Mitchell (1880) L. R. 6 App. Cas. 156 ; 50 L. J. P. C. 11 ; 43 L. T.. 710 ; zg W. R. 401 ; 45 J. P. 237 504, 524 Simmons 0. Norton (1831) 7 Bing. 640 ; 9 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 185 ; 5 Moo. &
Sinunoris
P-645
85,
79d
Simxinin v. Mallac (i860) 2 Sw. & Tr. 67 ; 29 L. J. P. M. & A. 97 ; 6 Jur. (N. S.) 561 ; 2 L. T. 327 1167,1204 Simpero. Foley (1862) 2 J. & H. 555; 5 L. T. 669 856,857 Simpson, Re [1916] i Ch. 502 ; 85 L. J. Ch. 329 ; 114 L. T. 835 . . 1242 Simpson 0. Bathurst (1869) L. R. 5 Ch. App. 193 ; 22 L. T. 29 ; 18 W. R. 772 873
....
8Q.
;
Simpson Simpson
546
i
o. 0.
......
L. R.
; .
.
700
148
B..14; 27 L. T.
21
K. B. 453 74 L. J. K. B. 347 92 L. T. 282 ; 21 T. L. R. 209 53 W. R. 390 458 Simpsdn v. Godmanchester (Mayor of) [1896] i Ch. 214 [1897] A. C. 696 ; 66 L. J. Ch. 770 ; 77 L. T. 409-^C. A 670, 710 Simpson . Hartopp (1744) Willes,' 512 . 972 Simpson v. Lamb (1856) 17 C. B. 603 25 L. J. C. P. 115 ; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 26 L. J. Q. B. 121 ; 3 Jur. 91 ; 4 W. R. 328 (1857) 7 El. & B. 84 4ij 241 (N. S.) 412 5 W. R. 227 Simpson v. L. & N. W. Ry. (1876) i Q. B. D. 274 45 L. J. Q. B. 182 33 L. T. 805 ; 24 W. R. 294 122 Simpson v. Savage (1856) i C. B. N. S. 347 ; 26 L. J. C. P. 50 ; 3 Jur. (N. S.) 161 . .^396 5 W. R. 147 Simpson v. Simpson (1838) 4 Bing. N. C. 333 . 652 Simpson v. Wells (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 214 41 L. J. M. C. 105 26 L. T. 163 858 Sims, J?s (1896) 3 Man. 340; 45 W. R. 189 1068 Siijis o. Midland Ry. [1913] i K. B. 103 ; 82 L. 107 L. T. 700 ; J. K. B. 67 18 Coni. Cas. 44 261 29 T. L. R. 8i Simson v. Ingham (1823) 2 B. & C. 65 3 D. & R. 249 1 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 113 234 ; 26 R. R. 273 Simson o. London General Omnibus Co. (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 390 ; 42 L. J. C. P. 112; 28 L.T: 560; 21 W. R. 595 259 Sinclair o.Broughton (1882) 47 L. T. I70r-P. C. . 443 Sinclair . Eldred (18 11) 4 Taunt. 7 492 Sinclair c. Fell [1913] i Ch. 155 ; 82 L. J. Ch. 105 108 L.T. 152; 29T.L. R. 1196 103 ; 57 Sol. Jo. 145 Singer Manufacturing Co. 11. Clark (1879) 5 Ex. D. 37 ; 49 L. J. Ex. 224 41 .' L; T, 551 420,957 44 J. p. 59 ; 28 W. R. 170 Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Loog (1882) L. R. 8 App. Cas. 15 52 L. J. Ch. 481 ; 48 L. T. 3 ; 31 W. R. 325 1029 Singleton v. Eastern Counties Ry. (1-859) 7 *- ^- -N- S- '^^7 334 Singleton v. Williamson (r86i) 7 H. & N. 410; 31 L. J. Ex. 287; 8 Jur. (N. S.) 157; 5 L.T. 645; 10 W. R. 301 84 Siniiott . Bowden [1912] 2 Ch. 414 81 L. J. Ch. 832 ; 107 L. T. 609 28 T. L. R. 594; [1913] W. C. & L Rep. 464 306 Sissons . Chichester [1916] 2 Ch. 75 114 L. T. 1163 60 85 L. J. Ch. 489 Sol. Jo., 605 1410 Sitwell, Re [1913] W. N. 261 1392 57 Sol. Jo. 730 Sitwelli;. Worrall(i898)79L.'T. 86 594 . , Six Carpenters' Case, The (1610) 8 Co. Rep. 146 a, 146 b 343 Skelton . Skelton (1677) 2 Swanst. 1702 789 Sketchley o. Berger (1894) 69 L. T. 754 707 Skinner, Re [1904] i Ch. 289 1123 73 L. J. Ch. 94 ; 89 L. T. 663 ; 52 W. R. 346 .
v.
i
; ; .
Simpson
...
;
.......
; ;
. . .
.'
......
; ; . .
. .
.......
,
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OP CASES
1,
(icVu
rtwjxi.
Skinner
v.
Gunton
(1669)
i
Wms.
Saund. 228
T.
Raym. 176
;
:
'
Vent.
. . .
12, 18,
19; 2 Keb. 473 3 Keb. 118 Skinner v. L. B. & S. C. Ry. (1850) 5 Exch. 787 15 Jur. 299 Skinner 0. Shew [1893] i Ch. 413; [1894] 2 Ch. 581; 63 L. J. Ch. 826 71 L. T. no; 8 R. 455 335,427,428 Skmner v. Upshaw (1702) 2 Ld. Raym. 752 260 Skipbrook v. Hinchinbrook (1805) 11 Ves. 252 8 R. R. 138 1422 Skippfr . Holloway [1910] 2 K. B. 630 79 L. J. K. B. 91 ; 26 T. L. R. 82 reversed, 2 K. B. 635 n. 26 T. L. R. 357 79 L. J. K. B. 496 C. A. 1050 Slade V. Chaine [1908] i Ch. 522 77 L. J. Ch. 377 98 L. T. 352 52 Sol. Jo, 240 C. A. 1123 Slade V. Pattison (1834) 5 L. J. Ch. 51 80,,581 Slade V. Torapson (161 5) 3 Bulstr. 58 901 Slanning v. Style (1734) 3 P. Wms. 334 1184 Slater, Re [1907] i Ch. 665 1264 76 L. J. Ch. 472 97 L. T. 74-C. Slatter o. Slatter (1833) i Yo. & C. (Ex.) 28 1323 Slazenger v. Spalding [1910] i Ch. 257; 79 L. J, Ch. 122 102 1026 27 R. P. C. 20 Sleigh II. Sleigh (1850) 5 Exch. 514 ig L. J. Ex. 345 295 Slingsby's Case (1588) 3 Swans. 178 156 Slinn, In the Goods 0/(1890) 15 P. D. 156 59 L. J. P. 82 63 L T. 229 39 W. R. 175 1238 Slobodinsky, Re [1903] 2 K. B. 517 72 L. J. K. B. 883 89 L, T, 190; 19 T. L. R. 616 860, 1066 52 W. R. 156 ; 10 Manson, 341 Sloman v. Walter (1784) i Bro. C. C. 418 136 Slubey V. Heyward (1705) 2 Hy. Bl. 504 3 R. R. 486 922 Smally v. Smally (1700)'! Eq. Ca. Abr. 6 24,52 Smart, In the Goods o/[i902] P. 238 71 L. J. P. 123 ; 87 L, T. 142; I T. L. R. 663 1239 Smart v. Hutton (1833) 8 A. & E. 568 n. 2 Nev. & M. 426 530 Smart v. Jones (1864) 15 C. B. N. S. jy 33 L. J. C. P. 154 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.; '. 12 W. R. 430 10 L. T. 271 678 7'5 Smart v. Sanders (1846) 3 C. B. 380; i6 L. J. C. P. 39; 10 Jur. 841 12 Jur. 751 17 L. J. C. P. 258 3:,240 (1848) 5 C. B. 895 Smartle . Penhallow (1701) i Salk. 188 672 Smartle 0. Williams (1694) i Salk. 245 762 Smee v. Smee (1879) 5 P- D. 84 49 L. J. P. 8 ; 44 J. P. 220 ; 28 W. R. 703 1257 Smethurst v. Mitchell (1859) i El. & EI. 623 28 L, J. Q. B. 241 5 ]pr. 63 (N. S.) 978 7 W. R. 226 Smith, In the Goods of (1869) L. R. i P. & M. 717 38 L. J. P. 85 21 L. T. 1240 17 W. R. :iio 340 Smith, Re (1883) 22 Ch. D. 586 52 L. J. Ch. 411 ; 48 L. T. 154; 31 W. R, . 1387 413 Smith, Re (1889) 42 Ch. D. 302 58 L. J. Ch. 860 61 L. T. 363 37 W. R. 1268
.
.
.482 .330
.
..
.
.
.7S
60 L.
J. Ch.
57
63 L. T. 448
39
W.
R
1253 1405 1397
1136,1414
75 L. J. Ch. 442
;
94 L. T. 643
70
.
J. P.
169
R. 412
"20
83L.J. Ch.
1105,1391,1394
Digitized
by Microsoft
CCVlll
TABLE OF CASES
(1854) 5 De G. M. & G. 712 ; 18 Beav. 499 l8 Jur. 968 ; 2 W. R. 698 Andrews [1891] 2 Ch. 678 ; 65 L. T. 175
o.
Adams
258
V.
o.
660
o.
...........
.
. .
..... ...
. . ;
24 L.
J.
Ch.
1319, 1324
701 597
J.
Q. B. 683
.
65 L. T. 467
. .
55 J. P. 446, 4^1
.
Barrett (1663)
Sid.
162
.911
App. Cas. 187 53 L. J. Ch. 873 50 L. T. 540 697 ; 32 W. R. 687 48 J. P. 644 Smiths. Claxton (1819) 4 Madd. 484 20 R. R. 320 13^8 Smith o. Clinton (1908) 99 L. T. 840; 25 T. L. R. 34 Smith V. Colgay (1595) Cro. Eliz. 384 362 Smith V. Day (1837) 2 M. & W. 6S4 M. & H. 135 6 L. J. Ex. 219 611 Smith V. Bay (1880) 13 Ch. D. 651 28 W. R. 712 C. A. Smith o. Evans (1751) I Wils. 313 1238 Smith V. Giddy [1904] 2 K. B. 448 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 894 91 L. T. 296 53 W. R. 207 ; 20 T. L. R. 596 406, 714 Smith V. Gold Cgast, etc., Ltd. [1903] i K. B. 285 72 L. J.i K. B. 235 ; 88 L. T. 442; 51 W. R. 373 C. A 67,98 Smith V. Green (1844) i Coll. 555 828, 829 Smith V. Haskins (1742) 2 Atk. 385 1375 Smith o. Hurst (1852) 10 Hare, 30 22 L. J. Ch. 289 ; 17 Jur. 30 1062 Smith V. Johnson [1897] (Wilkinson o. Downton) 2 Q. B. 57 329 Smith V. Kay (1859) 7, H.L. C. 771 ; 30 L. J. Ch. 45 6 Smith V. Kaye (1904) 20 T. L. R. 261 470 Smith V, Kemp (1692) 2 Salk. .637 Carth. 285 701, 719, 721 Smith V. Kenrick (1849) 7 C,,B, 515 18 L. J. C. P. 172 ; 13 Jur. 362 783 Smith V. L. & St. Katharine's Dock Co. (1868) L. R. 3 C, P. 326 37 L. C. P. 217 18 L. T. 403 ; 16 W. R. 728 332 Smith V. L. & S. W. Ry. Co. (1870) L. R. 6 C. P. 14 40 L. J. C. P. 2i ; 23 L. T. 678; 19 W. R. 230 329, 330 Smith o. Low (1739) i Atk. 489 89S Smith V. Lucas (1881) 18 Ch. D. 531 ; 45 L.- T. 460 30 W. R. 451 976 Smith V. McGuire (1858) 3 H. & N. 554 i F. & F. 199 55 Smith V. Malings (1607) Cro. Jac. 160 622 Smith 0. Marrable (1843) 1 1 M. & W. 5 Car. & M. 479 2 L. J. Ex. 223 636 Smith v. Milles (1786) i T. R. 475 408, 409, 1346, 1349 Smith . Parker (1844) 13 M. & W. 459 2 Dow. & 14 L- J394 Ex. 52 5" Smith n. Patrick [1901] A. C. 282 70 L. J. P. C. 19 L. T. 740 8 17
V.
Chadwick (1884)
;
L. R. 9
....... .......
. .
.
....-337
. . . ;
. .
-376
.......
; :
L-T. R.477 Smith . Peters (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 51 1 Smith B. Scott (1847) 2 Car. & Kir. 580 Smith V. Selwyn [1914] 3 K. B. 98 ; 83 C.A.
. .
271,
; .
104,
.
144
185
44 L.
J. Ch.
613
23
W.
R. 783
522
III L. T.
L. J. K. B. 1339
.
195
338 697 376 1200
Shepherd (1598) Cro. Eliz. 710 Smith (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 500 V. Smith [1898] P. 29 ; 67 L. 78 L. T. 27 J. P. 54 0. Streatfield [1913] 3 K. B. 764 ; 82 L. J. K. B. 1237 29 T. L. R. 707 Smith 0. Trowsdale (1854) 23 L. J. Q. B. 107 ; 3 El. & Bl. 874 ; 18 Jur. 552 Smith II. Whiteman [1909] 2 K. B. 437 78 L. J. K. B. 1073 C. A. Smith o. Widlake (1877) 3 C. P. D. 10 ; 47 L. J. Q. B. 282
o. 0.
. ; . .
.
i9 L. T. 137
520
83
;
2 C. L.
R
151
100 L. T. 77026
W.
R. 52
951 641
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Smith Smith Smith
.
ccix
PAGE
.
.
V. V.
V.
"69
.
Wilson (1807) 6 M. & S. 78 ; 8 East, 437 Woodfine (1857) i C. B. N. S. 660 Wright (i86i) 6 H. & N. 821 ; 30 L. J. Ex. 313
. .
jo6 i2z
S.)
.
(1808) I Camp. 439 Smithies v. National Association of Plasterers [1909] K. B. 259 i 100 L. T. 172 ; 25 T. L. R. 205
Smith
Young
...
;
7 Jur. (N.
.
\ >!
;
534 ^,q
K. B. 310
T.
78 L.
J.
Smurthwaite
v.
Wilkins (1862) 11 C. B. N.
.
479
31 L.
C. P. 214.. .
S. '842
.
;
.
< :
044
ii6
Smythe
(1818.)
;
2 Swanst. 251 ; 19 R. R. 72 69 L. J. P. 41 ; 82 L. T. 42
812 792
355 g^^
16 T. L. R. i6o
_
g
.
_
)mji-_ Sneed 0. Sneed (1747) I Ambl. 64 Sneesby v. Thome (1855) 7 De G. M. & G. i Jur. (N. S.) 1058 399 3 W. R. 605C. A. . Snellgrove 0. Baily (1744) 3 Atk. 214 .' Snelson v. Corbet (^746) 3 Atk. 369 .-**. Snow V. Boycott [1892] 3 Ch. no; 61 L. J. Ch. 591 ; 66 L. T. 762; 40 W. R. 603 Snow V. Whitehead (1884) 27 Ch. D. 588 51 L. T. 253 53 L. J. Ch. 885
; ; . .
. .
1,
458
33 W. R. 128 Snowball, Ex parte (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. 534 2o W. R. 786 Snowdon, Ex parte (i88i) 17 Ch. D. 44 29 W. R. 654
. .
.
404
;
41 L. J. Bky. 49
26 L. T. 894
239
50 L. J. Ch. 540
;
Ireland (1808) 10 East, 259 584, 69b v. Knight (1827) i Mood. & M. 74 526 Soar V. Ashwell [1893] 2 Q. B. 390 ; 69 L. T. 585 ; 42 W. R. 165 ; 4 R. 602 C. A. . . . . . . . . iioo^ 1 104, 1 146 Sobey v. Saintsbury [1913] 2 Ch. 513 ; 83 L. J. Ch. 103 ; 109 L. T. 393 ; .>0' . . . . 806 57 Sol. Jo. 836 _ .'''<. SoUey 0. Gower (1688) 2 Vern, 61 . . 752 SoUoryc. Leaver (1871)40 L. J. Ch. 398; 21 L. T. 453 993 .' Solly K. Rathbone (1814) 2 M. & S. 298 .' . Solomon, Re [1912] i Ch. 261 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 169 ; 105 L. T. 951 ; 28 T. L. R. 28 ; 56 Sol. Jo. 109 . . . . . . . 1118 Solomon v. Vintners' Co. (1S59) 4 H. & N. 585 ; 28 L. J. Ex. 370 ; 5 Jur. -^. (N. S.) 1177; 7W. R. 613 . . . . . . 713 Soltau V. De Held (1851) 2 Sim. N. S. 133 ; 15 Jur. 1151 ; 21 L. J. Ch. 153; 16 Jur. 326 375,392,401 Somerset, In the Goods of (tS6y) L. R. i P. & M. 350 1341 Somerset (Duke of). Re (1887) 34 Ch. D. 465 ; 56 L. J. Ch. 733 ; 56 L. T. ^'^B *. 145 ; 35 W. R. 273 29 Somerset, Re [1894] i Ch. 231 ; 63 L. J. Ch. 41 ; 70 L. T. 541 ; 42 W. R.
v.
'
Soane Soane
......
. . . . . . .
44 L. T. 830
'
-297
'
.....964
.
'
....
. .
'.
"
''
.
747 ; 5 L. J. Somerton's Case (1433) Y. B. II Hen; VI. fo. 18, pi. Somervill's and Turner's Contract [1903] 2 Ch. 583 L. T. 405 ; 52 W. R. loi '^L Somerville v. Hawkins (1851) 10 C. B. 583 20 L. J. Somes, Re [1896] i Ch. 250 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 262 ; 74 L.
1. .
3 P. Wms. 390 Fogwell (1826) 5 B. & C. 875 ; 8 Dow. (O. S.) K. B. 49 ; 29 R. R. 449
v.
Cookson (1735)
1140 929
v.
&
.
.
Ry. K. B.
.
'
700, 720
10
-537
;
72 L. J. Ch. 727
.
.
89
C. P. 131
15 Jur.
T. 49
44
W.
871
C.I..
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccx
TABLE OF CASES
V.
Sopies
,
30 L. J. Q. B. 229
.
Jur. (N..S.)76i; 8 W. R. 707 Sonday's: Case (161 1) 9;Rep. 1271b. Soobie V. Collins [1895] i Q. B. 375
,
,
.j;
1
,
. . . . .
967 666
64 L. J. Q. B. 10 ; 71 L. T. 775 15 R. 6 Soper zi. Arnold (1889) 14 App. Cas. 429 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 214 ; 61 L. T. 702 ; 38W. R.'449 136 Sotheran.B. Dening (1881) 20 Ch. D. 99 C. A 1249,1250 Souter V. Drake (1834) 5. B. & Ad. 992 193 3 N. & M. 40 3 L. J. K. B. 31 South, jc^ae (1818) 3 Swanst. 392 1051 South, Re (1874) L. R. 9 Ch. App. 369 ; 43 L. J. Ch. 441 ; 30 L. T. 347 ; 22 W, R. 460 863 11 L. T. 264 South 0. Bloxam (1865) 2 H. & M. 457 ; 34 L. J. Ch. 369 II Jur. (N. S.) 319 836 South African Territories v. Wallington [i8g8] A. C. 309 67 L. J. Q. B. 201,1014 470; 78 L. T. 426 46W. R.,545; 14 T. L. R. 298 S. E. Ry. o. Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1900) Ltd. [1910] I Ch. 12 loi L. T. 865 79 L. J. Ch. 150 74 J. P. 21 ; 26 T. L. R. 61 ; 54 Sol. Jo. 80 C. A. ^j \672,1076 South of England Dairies Co. v. Baker [1906] 2 Ch. 631 76 L. J. K. B. 78 " 629 96 L. T..48 South Hetton Coal Co. v. North Eastern News Co. [1894] i Q. B. 133 63 L. J. Q. B. 293 9 R. 240 ; 69 L. T. 844 i 42 W. R. 322 58 J. P. 196 C. A. 10, 346, i L 5>i 521, 525) 526 South of Ireland Coll. Co. v. Waddle (1868) L. R. 3 C. P. 463 4 C. P. 617 II 17 W. R. 896 38 L. J. C. P. 338 37 L. J. C. P. 211 South Metropohtan Cemetery Co. . Eden (1855) 16 C. B. 42 709 South Staffordshire Water Co.' b. Sharman [1896] 2 Q. B. 44 65 L. J. Q. B .-; 460 74 L. T. 761 ; 44 W*. R. 65,3 ., 424,772,921,937 Southampton's (Lord) Estate, Re (1880) 16 Ch. D. 178 ; 50 L. J. Ch. 218 R. 231 ,,. 818 43 L. T. 687; 29 W. Southampton v. Hertford (1813) 2 Ves. & B. 54; 13 R. R, 18 1082 Southcote V. Stanley (1856) 25. L. J. Ex. 339 i H. & N. 247 332 5o)itheyo. Sherwood (i8i7);2lHer. 435 374 Southport Tramways Co. . Ciandy [1897] 2 Q. B. 66 66 L. J. Q B. 532 76 45 'V^. R. 684-^C. A L. T. 815 388 Sowell V. Champion (1837) 6 A. & E. 407 ; 2 Nev. & P. 627 W. W. & D. 667 ,. 7L.J.Q.B. 197 412 Sowerby's Trusts, Re (1856) 2 K. & J. 630 1290 'f Sowerby o. Coleman (1867) L. R. 2 Exch. 96 36 L. J. Ex. 57 i 5 L. T. 667 . 15 W. R. 451 745 Spain, i?c(i9i5) 31 T. L. R. 435 1252 Spalding o. Thompson (1858) 26 Beav. 637 959 Spark 0. Spark (1559) Cro. Car. 305 647 Sparke's (Sir George) Case (1612) Winch, 6 716 Sparrow, Re [1892] i Ch. 412 61 L. J. Ch. 260 66 L. T. 276 40 W. R 326 884 Sparrow v. Oxford, Worcester & Wolverhampton Ry. (1852) 2 De G. M. & G. 16 Jur. 703 94;. 21 L.J. Ch. 731 187 Sparrow . Paris (1862) 7 H.,& N. 594 ; 31 L. J. Ex. 137 ; 8 Jur, (N.S.)39i 5L.T. 799 ..^;. 138 Speake o. Hughes [1904] i K. B. 138; 73 L. J. K. B. 172 89 L. T. . . 576 55 Speake v. Richards (1618) Hob. 2o6. . .i 324
; ;
. . .
.642
.......
;
.
.,
'.
;,
.....
; . .
.
....
;
. . .
'
.;......,.
,
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Speight
V.
cexi
PAGE
Gaunt
53 L. J. Ch. 419
50 L. T. 330
.
32 W. R. 435 1112,1113 ; Speight V. Gosnay (1891) 60 L. J. Q. B. 231 507 55 J. P. 501C. A. Speight V. Oliveira (1819) 2 Stark. 493 466 Spence, Re (1847) 2 Ph. 247 ; 16 L. J. Ch. 309 ; 11 Jur. 399 1219, 1225 Spencer Cooper, Re [1908] i Ch. 130 77 L. J. Ch. 64 ; 98 L. T. 344 1397 Spice V. Bacon (1877) 2 Ex. D. 463 46 L. 36 L. T. 896 25 J. Ex. 713 W. R. 840 Spiers v. English [1907] P. 122 ; 76 L. 1259 J. P. 28 ; 96 L. T. 582 Spirett V. Willows (1864) 3 De G. 12 L. T. 34 L. J. Ch. 365 J. & S. 293 614; II Jur. (N. S.) 70; 13 W. R. 329 1061 Spong V. Spong (1829) 3 Bligh (N. S.) 84 1265 48 J. P. 84
;
.
'
.247
Spooner
o.
Day
Sports, &c.,
[1917] 2 K. B. 125 ; 86 L. J. K. B. 702 ; 1 16 L. T. 626 ; 61 Sol. Jo. 299 ; 33 T. L. R. 204 C. A. 670 Spotswood V. Barrow (1850) 5 Exch. no ; 19 L. J. Ex. 226 . 214 Sprange v. Lee [1908] i Ch. 424 ; 77 L. J. Ch. 275 ; 98 L. T. 400 1316, 1317 Spratt, In the Goods of {li^j] P. 28 ; 66 L. J. P. 25 ; 75 L. T. 518 ; 45 W. R.
. . .
Agency
677
150
H. L. C. 588 ; 13 L. T. 164 6 N. R. 269 1280 Sprigge V. Sprigge (1868) L. R. i P, & M. 608 38 L. J. P. 4 19 L. T. 462 ; 17 W. R. 80 1252 Sprye v. Porter (1856) 7 E. & B. 78 26 L. J. Q. B. 64 3 Jur. (N. S.) 330 5 W. R. 81 33, 40 Spyer v. Hyatt (1855) 20 Beav. 621 i Jur. (N. S.) 315 3 W. R. 294 1319 Squire v. Midland Lace Co. [1905] 2 K. B. 448 74 L. J. K. B. 614 93 L. T. 29; 53W. R. 653; 69 J. P.257; 2iT. L. R. 466 Squire v. Squire [1905] P. 4 74 L. J. P. i ; 92 L. T. 472 21 T. L. R. 41 1200 Squire o. Wheeler (1867) 16 L. T. 93 246 Stafford's Case (1609) 8 Rep. 73 a 2 Brownl. 252 552, 553, 570, 640 Stafford (Earl of) v. Buckley (1750) 2 Ves. Sen. 169 656, 992, 1355 Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal 0. Bradley [1912J i Ch. 91 676, 677 '1383 Stahlschmidt . Lett (1853) 1 Sm. & G. 415 Stahlwerk, &c., Patent, iJe [1917] 2 Ch. 272 86 L. J. Ch. 670 1 17 L. T. 216 61 Sol. Jo. 479 31B 33 T. L. R. 339
11
;
.
............
.
1240
.225
Staight
V.
Burn
39 L. J. Ch. 289
;
22 L. T. 831
;
18
R. 243 Stainton v. Carron Co. (1853) 18 Beav. 146 2 W. R. 176 2 Eq. R. 466
;
W.
[1912] i Ch. 343 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 302 ; 105 L. T. 913 ; 56 Sol. Jo. 204; 28 T. L. R. 159 C. A. . 1076, 1077, 1082 . . Stamford v. White [1901] P. 46 ; 70 L. J. P. 9 ; 84 L. T. 269 . 1250 Standard Bank v. Stokes (1878) 9 Ch. D. 68 ; 47 L: J. Ch. 554 ; 38 L. T. 672 ;
(Earl),
Stamford
Re
........
23 L. J. Ch. 299
i8 Jur. 137
. . .
711
1332
26 W. R. 492 Standard Manufacturing Co., Re [1891] i Ch. 627 L. T. 487 2 Meg. 418 39 W. R. 369 Standen v. Chrismas (1847) 10 Q. B. 135; 16 L.
; ;
780
;
60 L.
J.
J.
Ch. 292
64
941, 951
Q. B. 265; ii Jur.
694 Standing
Bowring (1885) 31 Ch. D. 282 ; 55 L. J. Ch. 218 ; 54 L. T. 191 939, 34 W. R. 204 C. A. Stanford 0. Hurlstone (1873) L. R. 9 Ch. App. 116; 30 L. T. 140 ; 20 W. R.
v.
.......
1
588
; .
102
422
Staniland v. Willott (1852) 3 Mac. & G. 664 Stanley, Re [1916] i P. 192 85 L. J. P. 222 ; 32 T. L. R. 643
;
'
375
1290, 1291
14 L. T. 1182
;
60
Sol. Jo.
604
1244
o 2
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxu
TABLE OF GASES
; ;
1 14 L. T. 85 L. J. Ch. 809 ; 933 60 Sol. Jo. 478 657 Stanley v. Powell [1891] i Q. B. 86 60 L. J. Q. B. 52 63 L. T. 809 39 W. R. 76 55 J. P. 327 329, 380, 407, 434, 545 Stanley v. Stanley (1739) i Atk. 455 1308 Stanton 0. Brown [1900] i Q. B. 671 ; 69 L. J. Q. B. 301 ; 64 J. P. 326 48 W. R. 333; 16T. L. R. 156 722 Stanton v. Tattersall (1853) i Sm. & G. 529 187 17 Jur. 967 ; I W. R. 502 Star V. Rookesby (1710) i Salk. 335 705, 714, 783 Startup V. Macdonald (1843) '^ L. J. Ex. 477 6 Man. & G. 593 7 Scott (N. R.) 269 106, 113, 144 State Fire Insurance Co., Re (1864) 34 L. J. Ch. 58 11 L. T. 489 10 Jur, (N. S.) 1176; 13W. R. 152 117 Stathatos o. Stathatos [1913] P. 46; 82 L. J. P. 34; 107 L. T. 592; 29 T. L. R. 54; 57S0I: Jo. 114 1204 Stavers v. Curling (1836) 3 Bing. (N. C.) 355 2 Hodges, 237 3 Scott, 740 6 L.J. C. P. 41 134 Stead, Re [1900] i Ch. 237 1 100 69 L. J. Ch. 49 81 L. T. 751 ; 48 W. R. 221 Stead V. Platt (1853) 18 Beav. 50 1313 Steam v. Prentice Bros. [1919] i K. B. 394 88 L. J. K. B. 422 120 L. T. 445 ; 17 L. G. R. 142 ; 63 Sol. Jo. 249 ; 35 T. L. R. 207 784 Stedham, In the Goods of In the Goods of Dyke (1881)6 P. D. 205 ; 50 L. J. P 1254 75 ; 45 L. T. 192 45 J. P. 784 46 J. P. 40 ; 29 W. R. 743 Steed V. Preece (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 192 43 L. J. Ch. 687 22 W. R. 432 1360 Steeds o. Steeds (1.889) 5^ L. J. Q. B. 302 22 Q. B. D. 537 60 L. T.,318 37W. R. 378 145,157,158 Steel V. Dixon (i88i) 17 Ch. D. 825 50 L. J. Ch. 591 ; 45 L. T. 142; 29 W. R. 735 298 Steele, In the Goods 0/(1868) L. R. i P. & M- 575 37 L. J. P. 72 n. 19 L. T. 91 ; 17 W. R. 15 1253 Steele v. Brannan (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 261 41 L. J. M. C. 85 ; 26 L. T. 509 20 W. R. 607 404 Steele v. Williams (1853) 8 Exch. 625 ; 22 L. J. Ex. 225 17 Jur. 464 321 Steers v. Rogers [1893] A. C. 232 68 L. T. 726 : R. 173 1085 Steinson v. Heath (1693) 3 Lev. 400 697 Stenning, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 433 1 142, 1143 73 L. T. 207 ; 13 R. 807 Stephens, pae (1876) 3 Ch. D. 659, 807 44 Stephens, Re (1889) 43 Ch. D. 39 61 L. T. 609 59 L. J. Ch. 109 1386 Stephens, Re [1904] i Ch. 322 ; 73 L. J. Ch. 3 L. T. 167 91 52 W. R. 89 928, 1287 Stephens o. Bridges (1821) 6 Madd. 66 22 R. R. 242 553 Stephens v. Gadsden (1855) 20 Beav. 463 876 Stephens iJ. Lewis (1599) Cro. El^z. 673 849 Stephens v. Myers (1830) 4 C. & P. 349 432 Stephens v. Wall (1569) 3 Dyer, 282 b 727 Stephenson, Ex parte (1847) ' De G. 586 17 L. J. Bky. 5 12 Jur. 6 836 Stephenson & Co., ifc (1913)2 Ch. 201 ; 2oManson, 358 107 L. T. 33 C. A loog Stephenson 0. Hart (1828) 4 Bing. 476 i M. & P. 357 6 L. J. (0. S.) C. P, 97 29 R. R. 602 416 Stevens, Re [1897] 1 Ch. 422 66 L. J. Ch. 155 76 L. T. 18 45 W. R. 284 affirmed [1898] i Ch. 162 67 L. J. Ch. 1 18 jy L. T. 508 46 W. R. 177 14T. L. R. Ill 1333,1420, 142 Stevens, In the Goods of [1898] P. 126; 67 L. J. P, 60; 78 L. T. 389 14 T. L. R. 327 1337 Stevens v. Adamson (1818) 2 Stark. 422 ; 20 R. R. 707 186
........
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
.....
;
,-
'
..... .....
; ;
.
.........
; ;
; .
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Stevens
o,
ccxiii
PAGE Son [1919] 2 K. B. 722 ; 88 L. J. K. B. 1147 izi L. T. 354 ; 24 Com. Cas. 252 35 T. L. R. 594 C. A. 321 Stevens . Chown [igoi] i Ch. 894 ; 70 L. 84 L. T. 796 65 J. P. J. Ch. 571 470 ; 49 W. R. 460 17 T. L. R. 313 328, 695 Stevens I/. Hmce (1914) no L. T. 935 30 T. L. R. 419 1152 Stevens v. King [1904] 2 Ch. 30 ; 73 L. 90 L. T. 665 52 W. R. J. Ch. -535
Bromley
&
....
; ; ;
443 1290 Stevens v. Sampson (1879) 5 Ex. D. 53 41 L. T. 782 : 49 L. J. Q. B. 120 28W. R. 87 517 Stevens . Theatres, Ltd. [1903] i Ch. 857 72 L. 88 L. T. 458 J. Ch. 764 SI W. R. 58s ; 19 T. L. R. 334 825 Stevens v. Tyrell (1753) 2 Wils. i 586 Stevens o. Webb (1835) 7 Car. & P. 60 131 Stevenson & Sons v. Aktiengesellschaft [1918] A. C. 239 87 L. J. K. B. 416 118 L. T. 126 ; 34 T. L. R. 206 H. L. (E.) 31B, 282 Steward v. Gromett (1859) 7 C- B. N. S. 191 ; 29 L. J. C. P. 170 6 Jur. (N. S.)776 490 Stewart, /k ?Ae Goo(/j) of (1875) L. R. 3 P. & D. 244 25 Stewart v. Kennedy (i8go) 15 App. Cas. 75 17 Rettie (H. L.) i 27 Sc. L. R. 386 126 Sticklehorne o. Hatchman (1585) Owen, 43 785,791 Stikeman v. Dawson (1847) i D. & S. 108 16 L. J. Ch. 205 11 Jur. 214; 4 Railw. Cas. 585 347, 348 Stileman 0. Ashdown (1742) 2 Atk. 477 Amb. 13 1060 . Stiles, In the Goods of [1898] P. 12 ; 67 L. J. P. 23 78 L. T. 82 46 W. R. 444 14 T. L. R. 61 1335 Stocks V. Dobson (1853) 4 De G. M. & G. 11 22 L. J. Ch. 884 ; 17 Jur. 539 142 Stocks o. Wilson [1913] 2 K. B. 235 82 L. J. K. B. 598 108 L. T. 834 20 Manson, 129 29 T. L. R. 352 348 Stoddart v. Union Trust, Ltd. [1912] i K. B. 181 81 L. J. K. B. 140 ; 105 L. T. 806 C. A 1049 Stokes V. Berry (1699) 2 Salk. 421 389 Stokoe V. Cowan (1861) 29 Beav. 637 4 L. T. 695 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) goi ; 9 W. R. 801 1058 Stonard v. Dunkin (1809) 2 Camp. 344 11 R. R. 724 Stone V. Grubham (1614) 2 Bulstr. 225 1060 Stone V. Hoskins [1905] P. 194 74 L. J. P. no 93 L. T. 441 54 W. R. 1246 64; 21 T. L. R. 528 Stone V. Newman (1635) Cro. Car. 428 564, 570 Storke 0. Storke (1730) 3 P. Wms. 51 1226 Stote V. Tyndall (1757) 2 Lee, 394 1338 Stott V. Milne (1884) 25 Ch. D. 710 50 L. T. 742 C. A. 1120, 141 Strachan v. Universal Stock Exchange (No. i) [1895] 2 Q. B. 329; [1896] A. C. 166 ; 65 L. J. Q. B. 429 74 L. T. 468 ; 44 W. R. 497 ; 60 J. P. 468 ^H. L. (E.) 310,311 Strachan v. Universal Stock Exchange (No. 2) [1895] 2 Q. B. 697 65 L. j. 310 Q. B. 178 73 L. T. 492 ; 44 W. R. 90 59 J. P. 789 C. A. Strachy. Francis (1741) 2 Atk. 217 575 Strangways, Re (1885) 34 Ch. D. 423 56 L. J. Ch. 195 ; 55 L. T. 714 ; 35 W. R. 83C. A 884 Strata Mercella's (Abbot) Case (1591) 9 Rep. 24 a Moore, K. B. 297. 683, 849 Stratford-on-Avon v. Parker [1914] 2 K. B. 562; 83 L. J. K. B. 1309; no L. T. 1004; 58 Sol. Jo. 473 13^4 Stratheden (Lord), Re [1894] 3 Ch. 265 63 L. J. Ch. 872 71 L. T. 225 ; 42 W. R. 647; 8 R. 511 1073,1074,1077
; ; ;
.... ....
;
;
..... .....
; ; ; ; ;
.421
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxiv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
o.
.
v iq88 Best (1787) 2 Bro. C. C. 233 Streets;. Blay (183 1) 2 B. & Ad. 456 124 Strickland v. Strickland (1839) 10 Sim. 374 9 L. J. Ch. 60 1399 Strickland v. Symons (1883) 22 Ch. D. 666 ; 52 L. J. Ch. 423 48 L. T. 188 31 W. R. 888 1404 Strickland . Williams [1899] i Q. B. 382 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 241 80 L. T. 4 15 T. L. R. 131 C. A 50,988 Stripping's (Sir George) Case (162 1 ) Winch, 15 789 Strode o. Parker (1694) 2 Vern. 316 831 Strong V. Foster (1855) 17 C. B. 201 298 25 L. J. C. P. 106 4 W. R. 151 Strong . Strong (1854) 18 Beav. 408 1062,1063 810 Stronghill v. Buck (1850) 14 Q. B. 781 19 L. J. Q. B. 209 ; 14 Jur. 741 Stroud, Re (1849) ^ C. B. 502 i L. . 813 J. C. P. 117 Stuart V. Bell [1891] 2 Q. B. 341 60 L. J. Q. B. 577 64 L. T. 633 39 W. R. 612 518, 527 Stuart o. Crawley (1818) 2 Stark. 323 20 R. R. 691 250 Stuart O.Evans (1883) 49 L. T. 138 31 W. R. 706 Stuart V. Wilkins (1778) i Doug. 18 537 Stubbs' Estate, Re (1878) 8 Ch. D. 154 26 W. R. 736 1376 47 L. J. Ch. 671 Stubbs . Holywell Ry. (1867) L. R. 2 Ex. 311 5.36 L. J. Ex. i66; i6 L. T. 631 214 15 W. R. 869 Stubbs V. Slater [1910] i Ch. 632 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 420 102 L. T. 444 955 Stucley, Re [1906] i Ch. 67 75 L. J. Ch. 58 93 L. T. 718 54 W. R. 256 22 T. L. R. 33 C. A 119 Sturges V. Bridgman (1879) 11 Ch. D. 863, 865 41 L. T. 48 L. J. Ch. 785 200 C. A. 393, 394 219 ; 28 W. R. Sturmey's Trustee v. Sturmey (1912) 107 L. T. 718 1069 Sturton V. Richardson (1844) 13 M. & W. 17 ; 2 D. & L. 182 13 L. J. Ex. 281 8 Jur. 476 1093 Styant v. Staker (1691) 2 Vern. 250 605 Style B. Hearing (1605) Cro. Jac. 73 H. &Tw. Styles 0. Guy (1849) i M. & G. 422 ; 19 L. J. Ch. 185 ; 14 Jur. 355 1422 523 Styles V. Wardle (1826) 4 B. & C. 908 7 Dow. & Rv. 507 4 L. J. (O. S.) .' K. B. 81 28 R. R. 501 614,811 66 L. J. P. 98; 77 L. T. 137; 45 Suarez, In the Goods of [iS^y] F. %2 W. R. 704 1341 Suffello. Bank of England (1881) 9 Q. B. D. 555 149 Suffield V. Brown (1863) 33 L. J. Ch. 249 4 De G. J. & S. 185 3 New Rep. 12 W. R. 356 340 10 Jur. (N. S.) Ill 714 9 L. T. 627 Sugden v. St. Leonards (Lord) (i 876) i P. D. 1 54 45 L. J. P. 49 34 L. T. 372 24 W. R. 60 C. A 1251,1252 Suisse V. Lowther (1843) 2 Ha. 424 affirmed 12 L. J. Ch. 315 7 Jur. 407 1274 Sullivan o. Sullivan (1818) 2 Hagg. Con. 238 1175,1176 Sulzer V. Rochford [1906] i Ir. R. 399 1076 Sumner 0. Partridge (1740) 2 Atk. 47 .1313 Sunderland Co. v. Kearney (1851) 16 Q. B. 939 20 L. J. Q. B. 417 15 Jur. 1006 65 Wharton [1891] i Q. B. 491 60 L. J. Q. B. 233 ; 64 L. T. 866 Surman v. 39W. R. 416 13151 1317 Sury 0. Pigot (1626) Poph. 166 ; 3 Bulstr. 339 706 Sutherland (Duchess), Re [1914] 2 Ch. 720; 84 L. J. Ch. 126; 112 L. T. 72 1380, 1382 Sutherland (Duke) v. Heathcote [1892] i Ch. 475 61 L. J. Ch. 248 ; 66 L. T. 210 C. A 715,718,719
Stratton
....... ......
;
. .
;
'
......
.
....-451
.
...... .....
; ;
.
.811
...
..... .......
; .
. . .
.....
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Sutton, iJe (1912) 56 Sol. Jo. 650 . Sutton Coldfield Case (1635) Duke oii Charitable Uses, 68 . Sutton's Hospital Case (1613) 10 Rep. i ; i Roll. Abr. 513 Sutton i>. Johnstone (1786) 1 T. R. 544 . . Sutton V. Moody (1697) i Ld. Rayra. 250 . . .
. .
ccxv
PAGE
mo
4,89
Sutton Sutton
(1814) 5 Taunt. 758 Sadler (1857) 3 C. B. N. S. 87 1150; 5 W. R. 880 Sutton V. Stone (1740) 2 Atk. loi
c. V.
. .
Morgan
Sutton i;. Temple (1843) 12 M.&W. 52; 13 L. J. Ex. 17 Swainson v. N. E. Ry. (1878) 3 Ex. D. 341 47 L. J. Ex. 372 38 L. T. 201 26 W. R. 413 Swainson v. Swainson (1856) 6 De G. M. & G. 648 26 L. J. Ch. 119 3 Jur. (N. S.) 145 5 W. R. 187 Swans, Case of (1592) 7 Rep. 15 b Swan, Re [1915] i Ch. 829 ; 84 L. J. Ch. 590 113 L. T. 42 ; 31 T. L. R.
.
.
........
;
26 L. J. C. P. 284
.
.636
;
1256 590
448
1395
266.
Stransham (1567) Dyer, 257 a Swan's and Cleland's Graving Dock v. Maritime Insurance Co. [1907] i K. B. 116 76 L. J. K. B. 160 23 T. L. R. loi 12 Com. Cas. 73 Swayne's Cas'e (1608) 8 Rep. 63 a Moo. 811 i Brownl. 231 Sweeney v. Coote [1907] A. C. 221 76 L. J. P. C. 49 ; 96 L. T. 748 23
.
; ; ;
.
Swan
............ .......
.
. .
770
1270 635
1049 901
East, 4; 5 R. R. 497 967 Sweet V. Southcote (1786) 2 Bro. C. C. 66 757 Sweetapple v. Bindon (1705) 2 Vern. 536 ; i Eq. Cas. Abr. 394 752, 1313, 1357 Swift V. Jewsbury (1874) L. R. 9 Q. B. 301 ; 43 L. J. Q. B. 56 ; 30 L. T. 31 ;
i
......
;
.
484
22
W. R.
319
350, 541
Swift . Kelly (1835) 3 Knapp, 257 Swift V. Pannell (1883) 24 Ch. D. 210 ; 48 L. T. 351 ; 31 W. R. 543 Swifte o.. A.-G. for Ireland [1912] A. C. 276 ; 81 L. J. P. C. 158 ; 106 L. T. > . 3 ; 28 T. L. R. 199 Swinburne o. Milburn (1884) L. R. 9 App. Cas. 844 ; 54 L. J. Q. B. 6 ; 52 L. T. 222 ; 33 W. R. 325 Swindon Water Works Co. -o. Wilts., &c., Canal Co. (1875) L. R. 7 H. L. 704 45 L. J. Ch. 638 ; 33 L. T. 513 ; 24 W. R. 284 Swire v. Francis (1877) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 106 ; 47 L. J. P. C. 18 ; 37 L. T.
. . .
1167
952
1167 617
....
150
;
402
554 Swire v. Leach (1865) 18 C. B. N. S. 479 II Jur. (N. S.) 179; 13 W. R. 385 Swire v. Redman (1876) i Q. B. D. 536
'^
;
,542
1 1
34 L.
J. C. P.
L. T. 680
Sybray
v.
White (1836)
M.
& W.
;
435
958 298
784 416 Syeds o. Hay (i7gi)4T. R. 260 2 R. R. 377. Syero. Gladstone (1885) 30 Ch. D. 614; 34 W. R. 565 1396 .1123 Sykes, Re [1909] 2 Ch. 241 78 L. J. Ch. 609 ; loi L. T. i C. A. Sykes v. Beadon (1879) 11 Ch. D. 170 ; 48 L. J. Ch. 522 40 L. T. 243 ; 27 266 W. R. 464 i P. & D. 463 ; i Sykes v. Dixon (1839) 8 L. J. Q. B. 102 9 A. & E. 693 W. W. & H. 120 215, 475 Ch. D. 826 1017 48 L. J. Ch. 769 41 L. T. 79 Sykes v. Howirth (1879) 31A Sylvester's Case (1702) 7 Mod. Rep. 150 Symes v. Green (1859) ' Sw. & Tr. 401 ; 28 L. J. P. 83 5 Jur. (N. S.) 742 1257 Symons v. Leaker (1885) 15 Q. B. D. 629 ; 54 L. J. Q. B. 480 53 L. T. 227 ; 49 J. P. 775 ; 33 W. R. 875
1
&
G. 746
"
.856
Digitized
by Microsoft
Gcxvi
TABLE OF CASES
J>AGE
.
66 L. ]. P. 81 1191 77 L. T. 142 Synges. Syonge[i894] I Q..B. 466; 63 L. J. Q. B. 202 ; 70L. T. 221; 58 I.. . 120,146 J. p., 396; 42 W. R. 309 Synge V, Synge [1900] P, 180 ; 69 L. J. P., 106 ;; 83 L. T. 224 64 J. P. 454; 16T. L.-R. 388; affirmed [igoi] v. 217 i 70 L. J. P. 97 85 L. T. . 1193,1195 ,. 83; i7Ti L. R. 718 C. A
P. i7
; .
.
Symons
Symons [1897I
Tabernacle Building Society o. Knight [1892] A. C. 298 ; 62 L. J. Q. B. 50 ; 67 L. T. 483 ; 41 W. R. 207 56 J. P. 709 67 Taddy v. Sterious [1904] i Ch. 354 73 L. J. Ch. 191 89 L. T. 628 ; 52 W. R. 152; aoT. L- R. 102 927 Taff Vale Ry. . Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants [1961] A. C. 6 85 L. T. 147 426 ; 70 L. J. K. B. 905 50 W. R. 44 65 J. P. 596 Tailby . Official Receiver (1888) L. R. 13 App. Cas. 523 58 L. J. Q; B. 940,1051,1057 -75; 60 L. T. 162 ; 37W. R. 513 Talbot V. Bjaddill (1683-6) i Vern. 183, 394 49, 830 . Talbot J). Frere (1878) 9 Ch. D. 568 27 W. R. 148 1379 1281 Talbot . Shrewsbury (Duke of) (1714) Pre. Ch. 394 Gilb. Ch. 89 Talbot V. Shrewsbury (Earl of) (^840) 4;My,. & Cr, 672 9 L. J. Ch. 125 4 121 5 Jur. 38^ Tamplin v. James (1880) 15 Ch. D. 215 43 L. T. 520 ; 29 W. R. 31 f 126 Tamplin Steamship Co. o. Anglo-Mexican Co. [1916] 2 A. C. 397 85 L. J. K. B. 1389; 115 L. T. 315 21 Com. Cas. 299; 32 T. L. R. 677
;
...
....'.
; . .
.
....
;
;
'
Tamworth
133 Ferrers (1801) 6 Ves. 419 792 Tancred o. Leyland (1851) f6 Q. B. 669 20 L. J. Q. B. 316 ; 15 Jur. 394 532 Tangye 0. Tangye [1914] P. 201,; 83 L. J. P. 164; iii L. T. 944; 30 T. L. R. 649 ; ,58 Sol. Jo. .723 . 1180,1201 Tawkard, Re [1899] 2 Q. B. 57 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 670 ; 80 L. T. 500 15 L. T. R. 1069 33^; 47W.,R. 624; 6 Mansoii,! 188 Tapner v. Merlott (1739) Willes, 180 . . 58, 659 Target v. Gaunt (1718) i P. Wjtns. 432 ; Gilb. Eq. R. 149 ; 10 Mod. 402 1273 Tarleton . Liddell (1851) 17 Q. B. 390 ; 20 L. J, Q. B. 507 ; 15 Jur. 1170 1063
o.
; . .
H. L.
(E.)
...
...
Tarleton 11. McGawley (1793) i Peake, 270 Tarlton 0. Fisher (1781) 2 Dougl. 671
Tarn Tarn
v.
...... ...
.
.
480
343
;
32W. R.492
.
....
. '
50 L. T. 365
.
1346
57 L. J. Ch. 1085
. .
; .
59 L. T. 742
.
:
37
.
W.
Tarpley
829
522
C.
437
;.
2 Scott, 642
.
Hodges, 414
. .
; .
5L.
Tarry
r
v.
Ashton
,. J. C. P. 83. (187,6) i
Q. B. D. 314
,45 L. J. Q. B.
260
34 L. T. 97
. ;
24
R. 581 355) 397, 403 Shepherd (1861) 6 H. & N. 575 30 L. J. Ex. 207 4 L. T. 19 R. 476 215 9 W. Tasker v. Tasker [1895] P. i 64 L. J. P. 36 71 L. T. 779 43 W. R. 255 ; II R. 619 934 Tatam 11. Reeve [1893] i Q. B. 44 62 L. J. Q. B. 30 6y L. T. 683 ; 41 ^ W. R. 174; 57J. P. 118 312 Tate c. Hilbert (1793) 2 Ves. Ill 2 R. R. 175 .. 1291,1294,1393 Tatec. Leithead (1854) Kay, 658; 23 L. J. Ch. 736; 2W.R.630 1291, 1294, 1393 Tatton t.Wade (1856) 18 C. B. '371 540 Tayler o. Fisher (1591) Cro. EUz., 245 386 Taylor, Ex parte (1886) 18 Q. B. D. 295 L. J. Q. B. 195 56 35 W. R. 148 C Ai 1067
W.
Tasker
,
p.
...
;
...
; ;
.
, i
>.....,.
; ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Taylor,
ccxvli
PAGE
Re
1276 1144 962 640, 641 Taylor v. Bank of N. S. Wales (1886) 11 App. Cas. 596 55 L. J. P. C. 47 55 L. T. 444 299, 300 Taylor v. Bowers (1876) i Q. B. D. 291 46 L. J. Q. B. 39 34 L. T. 938 24 W. R. 499 C. A 43, 320 Taylor v. Brewer (1813) i M. & S. 290 21 R. R. 831 87 Taylor o. Brown (1839) 31 L. J. Ch. 453 ; 10 W. R. 361 Taylor . Bydall (1677) Freem. K. B. 243 26 Taylor v. Caldwell (1863) 3 B. & S. 826 8 L. T. 356 32 L. J. Q. B. 164 II W. R. 726 130, 132 Taylor o. Cole (1789) 3 T. R. 292 / Taylor v. Devey (1837) 7 A. & E. 409 2 Nev. & P. 469 ; Will. Woll. & Dav. I Jur. 892 646 7 L. J. M. C. u 745, 747 Taylor . G. E. Ry. [1901] i K. B. 774 70 L. J. K. B. 499 84 L. T. 770 ; W. R. 431 6 Com. Cas. 121 86 49 Taylor v. G. N. Ry. (1866) L. R. i C. P. 385 12 Jur. 35 L. J. C. P. 210 (N. S.) 372 ; 14 L. T. 363 ; 14 W. R. 639 251 Taylors. Hawkins (185 1) 16 Q. B. 308 20 L. J. Q. B. 313 ; 15 Jur. 746 527,528 Taylor v. Henniker (1840) 12 A. & E. 488 4 Per. & Dav. 243 9 L. J. Q. B. 383 53 Taylor o. James (1607) Godb. 150 699 Taylor v. Johnston (1882) 19 Ch. D. 603 51 L. J. Ch. 879 46 L. T. 219 30 W. R. 508 974, 981 Taylor v. Jones (1743) 2 Atk. 600 1063 Taylor v. Laird (1856) i H. & N. 266 ; 25 L. J. Ex. 329 88 Taylor v. London and County Banking Co. [1901] 2 Ch. 231 70 L. J. Ch. 17 T. L. R. 413 C- A. 760, 817 477 ; 84 L. T. 397 49 W. R. 451 Taylors. Manchester, &c., Ry. [1895] i Q. B. 134 ; 64 L. J. Q. B. 6 71 L. T. 596; 43 W. R. 120; 59 J. P. 100; 14 R. 34 477 10 L. J. Ch. 339 Taylor v. Martindale (1841) 12 Sim. 158 992 5 Jur. 648 Taylor v. Mostyn (1886) 33 Ch. D. 226 819 55 L. J. Ch. 893 ; 55 L. T. 651 2 Rose, 457 ; 16 R. R. 361 Taylor v. Plumer (1815) 3 M. & S. 562 .1142 61 L. J. Ch. 657 66 L. T. 565 Taylor v. Russell [1892] A. C. 244 41 W. R. 43 757) 1141 Taylors. Seed (1696) Comb. 383 764 4-R. R. 759 Taylor v. Shum (1797) i B. & P. 21 632 102 C.A. Taylors. Smith [1893] 2 Q. B. 65; 61 L. J. Q. B. 331; 67L.T. 39 Taylors. Taylor (1870) L. R. 10 Eq. 477 39 L. J. Ch. 676 ; 23 L. T. 134 ; 18 W. R. 1102 1378 1282 Taylor s. Taylor (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 155 44 L. J. Ch. 718 52 Taylor s. Timson (1888) 20 Q. B. D. 671 ; 57 L. J. Q. B. 216
373 ; Taylor, iJe [1913] W. N. 212 i 135 L. T. Jo. 239 Taylor, Stileman & Co., Re [1891] i Ch. 590 Taylor B. Ashe (1633) Vin. .44. X, 396 .
.
63 L. J. Ch. 424;
70 L. T. 556; 42
W.
R.
...'...
. . 1 .
.
-147
;'
..... .....
; .
-863
....... ........
; ;
J. P. 135
Taylors. Whitehead (1781) 2 Dougl. 745 Tebbs s. Carpenter (1816) i Madd. 290 16 R. R. 224 Tee s. Ferris (1856) 2 K. & J. 357 25 L. J. Ch. 437 ; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 807 Teevan s. Smith (1882) 20 Ch. D. 729 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 621 47 L. T. 208 ; 30 W. R. 716 Tempest s. Tempest (1856) 2 K. & J. 635 Templeton s. Tyree (1872) L. R. 2 P. & M. 420 41 L. J. P. & M. 86 27 L. T. 429; 21 W. R. 81 Tenants of Owning's Case (1587) 4 Leon. 43
; ; . ; ; ;
....
431;
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxviil
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
;
Tendring Hundred Waterworks v. Jones [1903] 2 Ch. 615 52 W. R. 61 ; 19 T. L. R. 720 357 Tennant v. Trenchard (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. 537 38 L. J. Ch. 661 ; 20 L. T. ^ 855 837 Teofani Co. o. Tec{ani'[i9i3] 2 Ch. 545 82 L. J. Ch. 490 109 L. T. 114 sub nom. In re 29 T. L. R. 674 30 R. P. C. 446 57 Sol. Jo. 686 Trade Mark No. 312065, 29 T. L. R. 591 C. A. 1025 Terry v. Hutchinson (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 599 18 L. T. 37 L. J. Q. B. 257 464,467,468,1235 521; 16W. R. 932; 9 B. & S. 487 Tetley o. Wanless (1867) 36 L. J. Ex. 25 L. R. 2 Ex. 21 ; 15 L. T. 255 ; 15 W. R. 356 Teutonia, The (1872) L. R. 4 P. C. 171 ; 41 L. J. Adm. 57 26 L. T. 48 20W. R. 421; 8 Moore, P. C. (N. S.) 411 132 Tewart v. Lawson (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 490 ; 43 L. J. Ch. 673 22 W. R. 822 574 Tewkesbiirfy (Bailiff) v. Bricknell (1809) 2 Taunt. 120 695 Thacker v. Hardy (1878) 4 Q. B. D. 685 ; 48 L. J. Q. B. 289 39 L. T. 595 ; 27W. R. 158 237, 313 Thames Ironworks Co. v. Patent Derrick Co. (i860) 29 L. J. Ch. 714 ; 2 L. T. 208; 6 Jur. (N. S.) 1013; I J. &H. 93; 8W. R. 408 Tharpe v. Stallwood (1843) 5 M. & G. 760 12 L. J. C. P. 241 ; 7 Jur. 492 I D. & L. 24 6 Scott N. R. 715 384, 410, 925, 1347 Thatched House Case (1716)1 Eq; Ca.Ab. 322 761 Thellusson v. Woodford (1799) 4 Ves. 226 13 Ves. 209 26, 1080 Thomas, Re [1912] 2 Ch. 348 81 L. J. Ch. 603 106 L. T. 996 56 Sol. Jo. C. A 571 1421, 1422 Thomas v. Bennet (1725) 2 P. Wms. 341 1281 Thomas v. Bradbury, Agnew & Co. [1906] 2 K. B. 627 75 L. J. K. B. 726 22 T. L. R. 656 95 L. T. 23 54 W. R. 608 509 Thomas v. Churton (1862) 2 B. & S. 475 31 L. J. Q. B. 139 ; 8 Jur. (N. S.) 512 795; 6L. T. 320 Thomas v. Howell (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 198 ; 30 L. T. 244 22 W. R. 676 1250 Thomas 11. Howell (1886) 34 Ch. D. i66 56 L. J. Ch. 9 ; 55 L. T. 629 1322 Thomas v. Jones (1841) i Y. & C. Ch. Cas. 510 790 Thomas v. Ketteriche (1749) i Ves. Sen. 333 1309 Thomas v. Quartermaine (1887) 18 Q. B. D. 685 56 L. J. Q. B. 340 57 L. T. 537^ 35W. R. 555; 51 J.P. 516-aA. 332,446,451 Thomas o. Roberts (1847) '6 M. & D. 778 3 De G. & Sm. 758 19 L. J. Ch. 506 14 Jur. 639 24 Thomas . Searles [1891] 2 Q. B. 408 60 L. J. Q. B. 722 ; 65 L. T. 39 W. R. 692 C. A 39 951 Thomas 11. Sylvester (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 368 42 L. J. Q. B. 237 29 L. T. 21 W. R. 912 290 738, 954 Thomas v. Thomas (1835) ^ Cr. M. & R. 34 ; i Gale, 61 5 Tyr. 804 4 L. J. Ex. 179 673, 674, 710 Thomas v. Williams (1834) i A. & E. 685 3 Nev. & M. (K. B.) 545 3 L.J. K. B. 202 Thomasin v. Mackworth (1666) Cart. 78 762 Thompson's Settlement, i?e [1904] W. N. 205 1106 Thompson, Re [1906] 2 Ch. 199 75 L. J. Ch. 599 95 L. T. 97 ; 54 W. R. 613 1073 Thompson 0. Cartwright (1863) 33 Beav. 178 2 De G. J. & S. 10 33 L. J; Ch. 234; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 1215; 9L.T. 4JI 12W. R. 116 991,992 Thompson v. Dibdin [1912] A. C. 533 81 L. J. K. B. 918 107 L. T. 66 ; 28 T. L. R. 490 56 Sol. Jo. 647 1 173
. ; . . ; ; ; ;
....
; .
.
-151
;
....
; .
.
.966
;
......
.
.
............
; ; ; ; ;
.
......
, . . . .
.
.215
.......
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Thompson
33
v.
ccxix
PAGE
J.
Thompson v. Hardinge (1845) ' C. B. 940 14 L. 607 J. C. P. 268 9 Jur. 927 Thompson v. Havelock (1808) i Camp. 527 10 R. R. 744 209, 217, 235 Thompson Hickman [1907] i Ch. 550 76 L. J. Ch. 254 96 L. T. 454 23T. L. R. 311 766,778 Thompson v. Montgomery [1891] A. C. 217 (1889) 41 Ch. D. 35 1028 Thompson v. Pettitt (1847) 'o Q. B. loi 16 L. Q. B. 162; 11 Jur.
;
......
Gibson (1841) 7 M.
& W.
Ex.
395 307
.
11.
;,
;
J.
i
748
Thompson
1
v.
Ross (1859)
;
L. T. 43
W.
5 H. R. 44
& N.
11
413
16
;
29 L. J. Ex.
J.
1133
:
Thompsons. Rourke
^66
;
[1893] P.
62 L.
501C. A
!;.
P. 46;
67 L. T. 78?;
R.
Thompson v. Shackell (1828) Mood. & M. 187 Thompson Thompson (1901) 85 L. T. 172 17 T. L. R. 572 Thomson v. Davenport (1820) 9 B. & C. 78 4 M. & Ry. no Thomson v. Eastwood (1877) 2 App. Cas. 215 H. L. (Ir.) Thomson Harding (1853) 2 El. & HI. 630 22 L. T. Q. B. 448
; .
7g
. .
...
. . : .
. .
526 1189 62
94
,345
-o.
18 Tur.
58
W.
R. 468
S.
362
46 L. J. Ch. ; (1880) 14 Ch. D. 763 ; 42 L. T. 851 28 W. R. 966 C. A.. 374, 501 Thornborow . Whitacre (1705) 2 Ld. Raym. 1164 . 95, '33 Thome v. Cann [1895] A. C. 11 ; 64 L. J. Ch. i 71 L! T. 852 ; 11 R. 67 830 Thorne zi. Kerr (1855) 2 K. & J. 54 ; 25 L. J. Ch. 57 ; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 322 ; 4 W. R. 131 1421 Thorne v. Smith (1851) 20 L. J. C. P. 71 ; 2 L. M. & P. 43 ; 15 Jur. 469 . 154
713
;
;
Kerry (Lord) (1812) 4 Taunt. 355 Thorley's Food for Cattle Co. v. Massam (1877) 6 Ch. D. 582
...
...
;
660 504
Tilbury (1858) 3 H. & N. 534 ; 27 L. J. Ex. 407 425 Neats (i860) 8 C. B. N. S. 831 2 L. T. 539 144 Thornley v. Thornley [1893] 2 Ch. 229 62 L. J. Ch. 370 68 L. T. 199 41 W. R. 541 ; 3 R. 311 1084,1087,1196 Thornton v. jenyns (1840) 9 L. J. (N. S.) C. P. 265 ; i M. & G. 166 i Sc. N. R. 52 94 Thoroughgood's Case (1584) 2 Rep. 9 a 37 Thorpe v. Bestwick (1881) 6 Q. B. D. 311 ; 50 L. J. Q. B. 320 44 L. T. 180 1260 45 J. P. 440 29 W. R. 631 Thorpe v. Brumfitt (1873) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 650 327, 337 Thorpe v. Holdsworth (1868) L. R. 7 Eq. 139 38 L. J. Ch. 194 17 W. R. 760 394 Threlfall, jR(i88o) 16 Ch. D. 274; 50L. J. Ch. 318 Throgmorton . Tracey (1555) Dyer, 124 b 650 Thurgood v. Richardson (1831) 7 Bing. 428 5 Moo. & P. 270 4 C. & P. 481 9 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 121 530 Thurn (Princess), &c. o. MofBtt [191 5] i Ch. 58 84 L. J. Ch. 220 ; 112 L. T. Sol. Jo. 26 T. L. R. 24 31B 31 114; 59 102 L. T. 838 Thursby's Settlement, Re [1910] 2 Ch. 181 79 L. J. Ch. 538 54 Sol. Jo. 581 C. A. Thurstan v. Nottingham Building Society [1902] i Ch. i ; 71 L. J. Ch. 83 87 L. T. 529 50 W. R. 179 23 Thurston v. Charles (1905) 21 T. L. R. 659 519 Thynne, i?e [191 1] i Ch. 282' 80 L. J. Ch. 205 104 L. T. 19 18 Mans. 34 928, 1052 Thynne v. Glengall (1848) 2 H. L. C. 131 ; 12 Jur. 805 affirming i Keen, 1281, 1283, 1284 769 ; 6 L. J. Ch. 25
Thorne
v.
..
. .
Thornhill
v.
.......
; ;
...
.
......
. . ; ; ;
.
.641
;
...
;
.754
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxx
TABLE OF CASES
tAGE
o.
; ; ;
Thynne
Shove (1890) 45 Ch. D. 577 59 L. J. Ch. 509 62 L. T. 803 38 W. R. 667 . Tidd . Lister (1852) 10 Hare, 140 62 L. J. Ch. 915 69 L. T. Tidd, In re ; Tidd v. Overell [1893] 3 Ch. 154 255 42 W. R. 25 Tidman . Ainslie (1854) 10 Exch. 63
. . . . . .
. . .'
1030 836
508 Tilbury v. Silva (1890) 45 Ch. D. 98 ; 63 L. T. 141 C. A. 605, 721 TiUett o. Ward (1882) 10 Q. B. D. 17 ;' Sz L. T. Q. B. 61 47 L. T. 546 31 " W. R. 197 47 J. P. 438 330, 358 61 L. J. Ch. 38 TiUott, Rs [1892] I Ch. 86 40 W. R. 65 L. T. 781 1 123 204 Timothy v. Simpson (1835) i Cr. M. & R. 757 5 Tyr. 244 ; 6 C. & P. 499 ; 4 L. J. M.'C. 73 437 Tingley o. MuUer [1917] 2 Ch. 144 86 L. J. Ch. 625 ; 116 L. T. 482 ; 61 31B Sol. Jo. 478f33T. L. R. 369 C. A. Tiping II. Bunning (1597) Moore, 465 598 tipping o. St. Helen's Smelting Co. (1865) L. R. i Ch. App. 66 394 Tipping 0. Tipping (1729). i P. Wms. 730 934, 1400 Tisdall o. Essex (1616) 3 Bulstr. 204 6i6 Tobino.'R. (1864) i6C. B.N. S. 310; 33 L. J. C. P. 199 10 Jur. (N. S.) 12 W. R. 838 1029 ; 10 L. T. 762 340 Todd V. Flight (i860) 9 C. B. N. S. 377 30 L. J. C. P. 21 7 Jur. (N. S.) 291 397,404 9 W. R. 145 3 L. T. 325 Tolhausen v. Davies (1888) 57 L. J. Q. B. 392 59 L. T. 436 52 J. P. 804 affirmed 58 L. J. Q. B. 98 C. A. 329 Tolhurst V. Assoc. Portland Cement Manufacturers, &c. [1902] 2 K. B. 660 ; B. 949 ; 87 L. T. 465 A. 141, 143 71 L. J. K. 51 W. R. 81 C. ToUemache, Re [1903] 1 Ch. 955 72 L. J.Ch. 539 51 W. R. 597 ;.88 L. T. 670 C. A. 1112 Toilet V. Toilet (1728) 2 P. Wms. 489 870 Tomalin v. Pearson [1909] 2 K. B. 61 78 L. J. K. B. 863 100 L. T. 685 ; 25 T. L. R. 477 460, 463 Tombs ..Roch (1846) 2 Coll. 490 1393 Tomes o. Chamberlaine (1839) 5 M. & W. 14 9 L. J. Ex. 32 644 Tomkins v. Jones (1889) 22 Q. B. D. 599 58 L. J. Q. B. 222 60 L. T. 939 16 37 W. R. 328 Tomkins?;. Tomkins (1858) I'Sw. cfcTr. 168 1188 Tomlinson II. Gill (1756) Amb. 330. 1418 Tomplin v. James (1879) 15 Ch. D. 215 43 L. V. 520 ; 29 W. R. 311 38 Toms 0. Wilson (1863) 32 L. J. Q, B. 382 ; 4 B. & S. 442 ; 10 Jur. (N. S.) 201 8 L. T. 799 ; 11 W. R. 592 17 L. T. 266 412 Tong . Robinson (1730) i Bro. P. C. 114 725 Tongue, Re [1915] i Ch. 390; 84 L. J. Ch. 378 112 L. T. 685 ; affirmed 128c [1915] 2 Ch. 283 ; 84 L. J. Ch. 933 C. A Tongue v. Tongue (1836) i Moo. P. C. 91 1170 Toogood 0. Spyring (1834) i C. M. & R. 181 4 Tyr. 582 3 L. J. Ex. 347 518,
. ,
.
......
; ;
.
204
....... ......
; ;
527 Glascock (1669) i Wms. Saund. 250 570 Torkington 0. Magee [1902] 2 K. B. 427 71 L. J. K. B. 712 87 L. T. 304 18 T. L. R. 703 ; reversed [1903] i K. B. 644 72 L. J. K. B. 336 ; 88 L. T. 443 19 T. L. R. 331 C. A 141, 1048, 1051 Torre s. Browne (1855) 5 H. L. C. 555 ; 24 L. J. Ch. 757 15 Torriano v. Young (1833) 6 C. & P. 8 626 Totcombe, Case of the Hundred of (1410) Y. B. 11 Hen. IV., Trin. pi. 44 (1412) 13 Hen. IV., Mich. pi. 28 675
Took
.....
; ; ;
....
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Tottenham U. D. Council
v.
;
ccxxi
PAGE
Williamson [1896] 2 Q. B. 353 75 L. T. 238 . 65 L. J. Q. B. 591 ; 44 W. R. 676 ; 60 J. P. 225 392 Tottersall's Case (1632) W. Jones, 283 684 Toulmin v. Steere (18 17) 3 Mer. 210 830 Tourret v. Cripps (1879) 4^ L. J. Ch. 567 ; 27 W. R, 706 lOI Toussaint v. Martinnant (1787) 2 T. R. 100 Z94 Towndrow, /Je [1911] i Ch. 662 80 L. J. Ch. 378 104L. T. 534 .1143 Townley o. Bedwel! (1808) 14 Ves. 591 1361
;
. .
....
.
Townley v. Watson (1844) 3 Curt. 761 Townsend v. Jarman [1900] 2 Ch. 698 69
;
1249
L. J. Ch. 823
W.
R. 158
Townsend v. Wathen (1808) 9 East, 277 Townshend v. Mostyn (1858) 26 Beav. 72 Townshend v. Windham (1750) 2 Ves. Sen.
;
...... .....
;
.
.
83 L. T. 366
49 1030
Townsonti. Tickell (1819) 3 B. & Aid. 31 22 R. R. 291 .^' 812,1268 Tozeland v. Guardians of West Ham [1907] i K. B. 920 76 L. J. K. B. 514 96 L. T. 519 71 J. P. 194 23 T. L. R. 325 ; 5 L. G. R. 507 C. A. 344 Tozer v. Child (1857) 7 E. & B. 377 26 L. J. Q."B. 151 3 Jur. (N. S.) 774 5 W. R. 287 529 Tozer.D. Mashford (1851) 6 Exch. 539 504, 524 Train v. CJapperton [1908] A. C. 342 ; Sc. (H. L.) 26 77 L. J. P. C. 124 1098 45 Sc. L. R. 682 Trash v. Wood (1839) 4 My. & Co. 324 9 L. J. Ch. 105 4 Jur. 669 751 Treasury Solicitor v. Lewis [1900] 2 Ch. 812 69 L. J. Ch. 833 83 L. T. 1291 139; 48 W. R. 694; 16T. L. R. 559 Trego V. Hunt [1896] A. C. 7 73 L. T. 514 44 W. R. 225 289, 1029, 1031 22 W. R. 843 Treloar v. Bigge ^1874) L. R. 9 Exch. 151 ; 43 L. J. Ex. 95 630 Tremeere v. Morison (1834) i Bing. (N. C.) 89 ; 3 L. J. C. P. 260 4 Moo. 1366 6 S. 603 i W. R. Trent v. Hunt (1853) 9 Exch. 14 22 L. J. Ex. 318 17 Jur. 899 646 481 Tresidder II. Tresidder (1841) I Q. B. 416 590 Treswell v. Middleton (1623) Cro. Jac. 653 ; 2 RoUe, 269 209, 476 . Trethewy v. Helyar (1876) 4 Ch. D. 53 46 L. J. Ch. 125 1391, 1392 Trevalion v. Anderton (1897) 66 L. J. Q. B. 489 ; 76 L. T. 642 C. A. 997 103 L. T. 212 Trevanion, Re [1910] 2 Ch. 538 54 Sol. Jo. 749 555, 566, 1081 762 Trevillian v. Andrew (1697) 5 Mod. 384 Tribourg v. Pomfret (1773) 2 Ambl. 733 n 834 82 L. T. 626 Trigg, In the Goods o/[i90i] P. 42 ; 69 L. J. P. 47 .1339 Trimble v. Hill (1880) 5 App. Cas. 342 49 L. J. P. C. 49 ; 42 L. T. 103 ; 28 311 W. R. 479 1258 Trimlestown v. D'Alton (1827) i Dow. & CI. 85 Trimmer v. Baynes (1803) 9 Ves. 209 1399 Tringham, Re [1904] 2 Ch. 487 73 L. J. Ch. 693 91 L. T. 370 20 T. L. R.
.
'
......
; ; ; ; ; ;
.
657 Trinidad Asphalte Co. v. Coryat [1896] A. C. 587 L. T. 108 ; 45 W. R. 225 Tripp V. Frank (1792) 4 T. R. 666 2 R. R. 495 Tritton, Re (1889) 61 L. T. 301 ; 6 Morrell, 250 TroUope & Sons . London Federation (1895) 72 L. Trott V. Buchanan (1885) 28 Ch. D. 446 54 L. J. 33 W. R. 339 Trotter v. Trotter [1899] i Ch. 764; 68 L. J. Ch. W. R. 477; 15T. L. R. 287
; ;
....
754
65 L. J. P. C. 100
.
75 811
695, 696
929, 1052
.
...
. .
428
'39'
363
80 L. T. 647; 47
. .
1260
Trotter
v.
Windham &
Co. (1907) 23 T. L. R.
676C.
A.
423
Digitized
by Microsoft
CCXXll
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
.
v.
Troward
Trueman
>
729
;
P.
165
Trueman
(1766) 2 Wils. 296 Triiro (Lady), In the Goods of (1866) L. R. i P. & M. 201 ; 35 L. J. P. 89 ; 14 L. T. 893 ; 14 W. R. 976 Truro Corporation 0. Rowe [1901] i K. B. 870 ; 70 L. J. K. B. 794 ; 87 L. T. 386 ; 66 J. P. 821 ; SI W. R. 68 ; 18 T. L. R. 820 C. A.
v.
Walgham
......
;
1
&
D. 567
9 L. J. Q. B.
60 682 1239
v. Merchant Taylors' Co. (1856) ii Ex. 855 857 Trustees' and Exofs.' Co. v. Short (1888) L. R. 13 App. Ca. 793 ; 58 L. J. . P. C. 4 ; 59 L. T. 677 ; 53 J. P. 132 ; 37 W. R. 433 767, 842, 843 Tuam (Archbishop) p. Robeson (1828) 5 Bing. 17 ; 2 Mop. & P. 32 6 L.J. 5i, 525 (O. S.) C. P. 199 Tubbs V. Wynne [1897] i Q. B. 74 ; 66 L. J. Q. E. 116 317 Tubervilo. Stamp (1697) i Salk. 13 . . 406, 776 Tuberville v. Savage (1670) i Mod. 3 ; 2 Keb. 545 ; i Vent. 256 431 Tuck V. Priester (i88'7) 19 Q. B. D. 629 ; 56 L. J. Q. B. 553 ; 36 W- R. 93 ; 52 J. P. 213 C. 223, 427 Tuck o. Southern Bank (1889) 42 Ch. D. 471 ; 60 L. T. 885 . 941 Tucker, In the Goods 0/(1864) 3 Sw. & Tr. 585 . 1336 34 L. J. P. 29 Tucker, Re [1893] 2 Ch. 323 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 442 ; 69 L. T. 85 ; 41 W. R. 505 ;
Truscott
....
747
..
R- 436 837, 994 v. Linger (1883) L. R. 8 App. Ca. 508 52 L. J. Ch. 941 ; 49 L. T. 105,787 373; 32W. R.40; 48J. P.4-H. L. (E.) Tucker . New Brunswick Trading Co. (1890) 44 Ch. D. 249 59 L. J. Ch. 551; 63 L. T. 69 38 W. R. 741 C. A 376 Tucker v. Newman (1839) 11 A. & E. 40 396 Tuff V. Warraan (1858) 5 C. B. N. S. 573 27 L. J. C. P. 322 5 Jur. (N. S.) 222 6 W. R. 693 ^ 333 Tufnello. Borrell (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 194; 44 L. J. Ch 756 ; 23 W. R. 717 Tugwell, Re (1884) 27 Ch. D. 309; 53 L. J. Ch. 1006; L. T. 83 33 W. R. 132 1362 Tulk V. Moxixay (184B) it Beav. 571 804, 807 Tullay B. Read (1823) i C. & P. 6 435 Tullett V. Armstrong (1838) i Beav. i 8 L. J. Ch. 19 2 Jur. 912; 4 My. &
3
. .
Tucker
....
;
; .
.......
; . :
'
C.377; 9L.
Tullidge
v.
Wade
;
Tunbridge Wells
L. T. 385
45
.
A. C. 434
;
60 J. P. 788-^H. L. (E.) Tupper V. Foulkes (1861) 9 C. B. N. S. 797 7 Jur. (N. S.) 709 ; 9 W. R. 349
381,777
30 L. J. C. P. 214
;
3 L. T., 741
Jur. (N. S.) 917 ; 3 W. R. 616 . 74 L. J. Ch. 438 ; 53 W. R. 440 ; Turner, Re (1872) 41 L. J. Q. B. 142 ; 25 L. T. 907 Turner, iJe [1897] i Ch. 536; 66 L. J. Ch. 282; 76 L. T. 116; 45 W. R.
J.
&
665
-441
1122
76 L.
524C. A
J.
Ch. 492
96 L. T. 798
;
23 T. L. R.
1
138
Turner v. Ambler (1847) 10 Q. B. 252 11 L. J. Q. B. 158 6 Jur. 346. 491, 493 Turner v. Bennett (1841) 11 L. J. Exch. 453 9 M. & W. 643 642 Turner o. Buck (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 301 43 L. J. Ch. 583 22 W. R. 748 1272 Turner P. Cox (1853) 8 Moo. P. C. C. 288 1372 Turner v. Ford (1846) 15 M. & W. 212; 15 L. J. Ex. 215 414 301' Turnero. Hockey (1887) 56 L. J. Q. B.
;
.
...
.
.
.415
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Turner v. Turners. Turner o. Turner v.
; ;
ccxxiii
PAGE
Marriott (1867) L. R. 3 Eq. 744 ij L. T. 607 ; 15 W. R. 420 840 Mason (1845) 14 M. 112; 14 L. J. Ex. 311 209,213 Meyers (1808) I Hagg. Con. 414 1171,1175 Meymott (1823) i Bing. 158 7 Moore, 754 i L. J. (O. S.) C. P. R. R. 612; 79 Mob. 574 31 25 83 Turner v. Robinson (1833) 5 B. & Ad. 789 ; 2 N. & M. 829 ; 6 Car. & P. 15
.
&W.
209, 213
Turner
49
v.
Sawdon
[1901] 2 K. B. 653
W. R. 712
;
70 L. J. K. B. 897
;
85 L. T. 222
208, 222
Smith [1901] i Ch. 213 70 L. J. Ch. 144 83 L. T. 704 ; 49 W. R. 186; 17T. L. R. 143 Turner v. Stallibrass [1898] i Q. B. 56 ; 67 L. J. Q. B. 52 ; 77 L. T. 482 46
Tiirner v.
Sig
W.
R.
v.
81C. A
331, 336
.
(i888> 13 P. D. 37 ; 57 L. J. P. 40 ; 58 L. T. 387 ; 52 . 36 W. R. 702 1177 ; Turner v. Turner (1783) i Bro. C. C. 317 ; Amb. 776 Turner v. Wright (i860) 2 De G. F. & T- 234 ; 29 L. J. Ch. 598 ; 6 Jur. (N. S.) 809 ; 8 W. R. 675 ." . . . 557, 563, 668, 786 Turton v. Turton (1889) 4-2 Cli. D. 128 ; 61 L. T. 571 ; 38 W. R. 22 C. A. . 1029 Tussaud V. Tussaud (1878) 9 Ch. D. 363 ; 47 L. J. Ch. 849 ; 39 L. T. 113 ; 26 W. R. 874 1284 Tweddle v. Atkinson (1861) 30 L. J. Q. B. 265 ; 4 L. T. 468 ; 9 W. R. 781
J. P. 151
. . .
Turner
Thompson
-991
1067 Twigg's Estate, Re [1892] i Ch. 579 ; 61 L. J. Ch. 444 66 L. T. 604 ; 40 W. R. 297 1317, 1318 Twining . Muscott (1844) 12 Mr & W. 832 591 Twisden v. Lock (1768) 2 Amb. 663 655, 657 Twisden v. Twisden (1804) 9 Ves. 413 7 R. R. 254 1310 Twopenny v. Young (1824) 3 B. & C. 208 J Dow. & Ry. (K. B.) 259 298 Twycross v. Grant (1878) 4 C. P. D. 45 48 L. J. C. P. i 39 L. T. 616 27 W. R. 87C. A. 362 Twyne's Case (1601) 3 Rep. 81 a 1059, 1060 Tyler 0. Tyler [1891] 3 Ch. 252 60 L. J. Ch. 686 65 L. T. 367 ; 40 W. R. 7 C. A. 1077 Tynt V. Tynt (1729) 2 P. Wms. 542 934, 1393, 1400, 1401 Tyrrell's (Lady) Case (1674) Freem. K. B. 304 11 84 Tyrrell's Estate, Re [1907] i Ir. R. 292 1076 Tyrrell v. Painton [i894]'P. 151 70 L. T. 453 ; 42 W. R. 343 6 R. 540 C. A 1259 11 R. Tyrrell v. Painton [1895] i Q. B. 202 ; 71 L. T. 687 ; 43 W. R. 163 589 C. A 1057 . Tyrringham's Case (1584) 4 Rep. 36 b 84, 673, 675, 676, 721 Tyser v. Shipowners' Syndicate [1896] i Q. B. 135 ; 65 L. J. Q. B. 238 ; 73 8 Asp. M. C. 81 L. T. 605 ; 44 W. R. 207 154 Tyson o. Smith (1838) 9 A. & E. 406 (1837^) 6 A. & E. 745 : N. & P. 784 6 L. J. K. B. 189 385, 744. 745. 747
no
..........
J.
103, 104
Q. B. 505
66 L. T. 233
......
; ;
.
....
. .
.......
; ;
. .
....
Udall
V.
777
&
N. 172
30 L. J. Ex. 337
7 Jur. (N.
S.)
542
Udny a. Udny
Underbill
Underwood
(1869) L. R. I Sc. App. 441 . Horwood (1804) 10 Ves. 225 ; affirmed 14 Ves. 28 . 0. Underwood [1894] P. 204 ; 63 L. J. P. 109 ; 70 L. T. 390
;
2,4
-
156
152
6 R. 604
42
W.
R.
372C. A
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxxiv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
i
Ch. 550 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 318 ; 84 L. T. 2595 17 T. L. R. 241 ; 18 R. P. C. 170 ; affirmed [1902] i Ch. 783 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 353 i 86 L. T. 439 ; so W. R. 467 ; 18 T. L. R. 453 ; 19 R. P. C. 281
C.
1025
of
;
Union Bank
'
London
37
o.
Kent
57 L. J. Ch. 1022
59
L. T. 714
W.
R. 364
.
760
. .
Union Lighterage Co. 0. London Graving Dock Co. [1902] 2 Ch. 557 ; 71 L. J. Ch. 7^1 ; 87 L. T. 381 i 18 T. L. R. 754 C. A. 713,850 United Collieries v. Simpson [1909] A. C. 383 78 L. J. P. C. 129 loi L. T.
; ;
129
25 T. L. R. 678
46
Sc. L.
R. 780
;
S. C.
364 United Land Co. v. G. E. Ry. (1875) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 586 44 L. J. Ch. L. T. 292 W. R. 896 23 707 685 33 Unity Bank, Ex pane (i 8 58) 3 De G. & J. 63 27 L. J. Kky. 3354 Jur. (N. S.) 348 1257 6 W. R. 640 Unity Joint Stock Banlf 0. King (1858) 25 Beav. 72 27 L. J. Ex. 585 . . 840 4 Jur. (N. S.) 470 ; 6 W. R. 264 Universal Stock Exchange v. Strachan [1896] A. C. 166 65 L. J. Q. B. 428 ; 3">3i2 74 L. T. 468 44 W. R. 497 60 J. P. 468 University College v. Taylor [1908] P. 140 77 L. J. P. 20 98 L. T. 472 24 T. L. R. 29 C. A 1239 Upton Cottrell Dormer, Re (1915) 84 L. J. Ch. 86i ; 112 L. T. 974; 31 T. L. R. 260 1357
; ; . ; ;
. .
H.
L. 19
:
'
...
; ;
Upton
o.
Dawkin
v.
.
Urq'uhart
.......
;
701
57 L.
J.
Ch. 521
750 Urquhart . Macphersop (1878) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 831 Uruguay, &c., Ry., Re (1879) 11 Ch. D. 372 ; 481.
571
...
....
;
58 L. T.
2,3
35
J.
Ch. 540
;
27
W. R.
1007
;
47 L.
J. C. P.
323
Ussher [1912] 2 Ir. R. 445 ' ^6 I. L. T. 109 Utley, iie[i9i2] W. N. 147; 106L. T. 858; 56 Sol. Jo. 518 Ussher
v.
....
.
. . . .
38 L. T. 65
26
516 1157 1123
Vachell
v. JeflEereys
63 L. T. 128 38 W. R. 516 Valentine v. Canali (1889) 24 Q. B. D. 166 59 L. J. Q. B. 74 ; 61 L. T. 731 38W. R. 331; 54J. P. 295 Valentine v. Hyde [1919] 2 Ch. 129; 88 L. J. Ch. 326; 120 L. T. 653 63 Sol. Jo. 390 35 T. L. R. 301 Valentini v. Canali (1889) 24 Q. B. D. 166 59 L. J. Q. B. 74 ; 61 L. T. 731
Vadala
v.
.......
; ;
1310 323
23
480
38W.
Valpy,
,974
i Ch. 531 ; 75 L. 94 L. T. 472 54 W. R. 401 1397 J. Ch. 301 Vandenbergh c. Spooner (1866) L. R. i Ex. 316 35 L. J. Ex. 201 14 L. T. .101 701 4 H. & C. 519 14 W. R. 843 Vane v. Lord Barnard (1716) 2 Vern. 738 576, 786, 791 Van Gheluive v. Nerinckx (1882) 21 Ch. D. 189; 51 L. J. Ch. 929; 47
; ;
Re
....
, .
L. T. 46
30
W.
R. 789
; ;
;
Van Grutten v. Foxwell [1897] A. C. 658 66 L. J. Q. B. 745 Vanneck v. Benham [1917] i Ch. 60 86 L. J. Ch. 7 115 L. Van Straubenzee, Re [1901] z Ch. 779 70 L. J. Ch. 825
;
; ;
17T. L. R. 755 Vardon's Trusts, Re (1885) 31 Ch. D. 275 34 W. R. 185 Vaughan . Atkyns (1771) 5 Burr. 2764
. .
...
55 L. J. Ch. 259
...
752
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Vaughan
6 L.
v.
ccxxv
PAGE
Menlove (1837)
3 Bing.
;
N. C. 468
4 Scott, 244
.
3 Hodges, 51
Vaughan
P. 92 ; I Jur. 215 7 Car. & P. 525 Taff Vale Ry. (i860) 5 H. & N. 679 ; 29 L. J. Ex. 247 ; (N. S.)899; 2L.T. 394; 8W. R. 549 Vaughan o. Watt (1840) 6 M. & W. 492 ; 9 L. J. Ex. 272 Vautin, Re [1899] 2 Q. B. 549 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 971 ; 48 W. R. 96 6
J. C.
v.
....
.
829 Veal (1859) ^7 Beav. 303 ; 29 L. J. Ch. 321 2 L. T. 228 6 Jur. (N, S.) 527 8 W. R. 2 .11^1292 Venables o. Foyle fi66o) I Cha. Ca. 2 h. 819 Venezuela Co. v, Kisch (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 99 ; 36 L. J. Ch. 849 ; 16 L. T. 500; 15 W. R. 821 541 Vernon's Case (1572) Dyer, 317 a ; 4 Co. Rep. i a ; Benl. 210 ; 3 Lton. 28 1322 Vernon o. Keyes (1810) 12 East, 632 ; 4 Taunt. 488 538 Vernon 0. Wright (1858) 7 H. L. C. 35 562 Verrall v. Robinson (1835) 2 Cr. M. & R. 49; ; 4 Dowl. 242 ; i Gale, 244 5 Tyr. 1069 419 Verry v. Watkins (1836) 7 C. & P. 308 469 Vibart v. Coles (1890) 24 Q. B, D. 364 .59 L. J. Q. B. 152 62 L. T. 551 ; 38 W. R. 359-C. A 1379 Vicars o. Wilcocks (1806) 8 East, i . 504 Vicars Choral of Litchfield v. Ayres (1639) Sir W. Jones, 435 672 Vickers v. Bell (1864) 10 L. T. 77 10 Jur. (N. S.) 376 ; 12 W. R. 589 1333 Villar V. Gilbey [1907] A. C. 1 39 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 339 96 L. T. 5 1 1 23 T. L. R. 392 "L26, 1074 Villareal c. Melhsh (1737) 2 Swans. 533 . 1215 Villers c Beaumont (1682) i Vern. 100 813 Villers v. Monsley.(i769) 2 Wils. 403 . 524 Vine, Ex parte (1878) 8 Ch. D. 364 38 L. T. 730 26 47 L. J. Bky. ii6 W. R. 582 28 Viner v. Francis (1789) 2 Cox, igo 2 Bro, C. C. 658 ; 2 R. R. 29 1286 Viner v. Vaughan (1840) 2 Beav. 466 574, 790 102 L. T. 141 ; 26 Vines, In the Estate qfiigio] P. 147 ; 79 L. J. P. 25 .IS 1240 T. L. R. 257 54 Sol. Jo. 272 ' Vinkinstone v. Ebden (1697) Carth. 357 69^ Vint V. Padget (1858) 2 De G. & J. 61 1 ; 28 L. J. Ch. 21 4 Jur. (N. S.) 1 1 22 > 6W. R, 641 834 C. A. . Vizetelly v. Mudie [1900] 2 Q. B, 170 ; 69 L. J. Q. B. 645 506, 507, 544 Vogan & Co. V. Oul.ton (1898) 79 L. T. 384 195 Von Buseck, In the Goods o/(i88i) 6 P. D. 21 1 51 L. J. P. 9 ; 46 J- P- 104 . 1243 30 W. R,..i40 Von Hellfield v. Rechnitzer [1914] 1 Ch. 748 ; 83 L. J. Ch. 521 no L. T. . 31A 877; 58 Sol. Jo. 4I4^C. A Von Joel V. Hornsey [1895] 2 Ch. 774 65 L. J. Ch. 102 73 L. T. 372 C. A. 375, 376, 401 Voss' and Saunders' Contract [191 1] i Ch. 42 ; 80 L. J. Ch. 33 103 L. T. 810 493 ; 5S Sol. Jo. 12 Vowles p. Miller (i8io) 3 Taunt. 137 779 1246 Vynior's Case (1610) 8 Co. Rep. 81 b ; i Brownl. 62 2 Brownl. 290 Vyse V. Foster (1874) L. R. 7 H. L. 318 44 L. J. Ch. 37 31 L. T. 177 1417 23 W. R. 355 Vyse V. Wakefield (1840) 7 M. & W. 126 ; 8 D. P. C. 61 1 ; affirming 9 L. J. Ex.
391
B.
:
Veal
....
; . . .
.
....... ......
; .
274
''
"S
2
Vyvyan
&
C.L.
L. J. (O. S.)
K. B. 138
Dow.
1363
Digitized
by Microsoft
ecxxvi
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
. -^ .
(':' R. (1876) I P. D.i 405 1177 J 108 Wade's. Case (1600) 5 Rep. 115 Wadham .-'Marlowe(i785)'8 East, 314 n ..J'. 549 Wadhurst o. Damme (1604) Cro. Jac. 44. '' 361, 703 100 L. T. 955. 882 W^gstaff's S. E., Re [1900] 2 Ch. 201 78 L. J. Ch. 513 WaidaiiisjJ?ci[igo8] * Ch. 123 77L. J. Ch. 12; 97 L. T. 707 1107 100,101 , Wain 0. WaMters (1804) 5 East, 10
W.
o.
'
......
;
...
.
,
Wainewright, i?e,(i843) I Phill. 258 567 Wainford v. Heyl (i875).L. R. 20 Eq. 321 44 L. J. Ch. 567 ; 33 L. T. 155 ; 23.W. R. 848 3481 1098 Waite V. Jennings [1906] 2 K. B. 11 75 L. J. K. B. 543 54 W. R. 511 22 T. L. R. 510 631, 632 95 L. T. I Waite V. Moriand (1888) 38 Ch. D. 135 59 L. T. 185 ; 57 L. J. Ch. 655 1197 36 W. R. 484 Waite V. N. E. Ry. (1858) E. B. & E. 719 28 L. J. Q. B. 258 5 Jur. (N. S.) .. . 333 936; 7 W. R. 311 Waites o. Franco-British Exhibition {1909) 23 T. L. R. 441 C. A. 458 .1176 Wakefield o. Mackay (1807) I Phill. 134 Wakeham 11. Merrick (r867)'37 L. J. Ch. 45 17 L. T. 134 ; 6 W. R. 73 995 Wakelin v. L. & S. W. Ry. (1886) L. R. 12 App. Cas. 41 ; 56 L. J. Q. B. 229 51 J- P- 44 H. L. (E.) 55 L. T. 709 35 W. R. 141 Waldock V. Winfield [1901] 2 K. B. 596 ; 70 L. J. K. B. 925 85, L. T. 202 : 17 T. L. R. 661 C. A 107 L. T. 657 Walford;. Walford [1912] A. C. 658 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 828 56 .Sol. Jo. 631 1271 50 Sc. L. R, 602 Walgham v. Key (1766) 2 Wils. 296 697 Walker, Re [1.901] i Ch. 879 70 L. J. Ch. 417 ; 84 L. T. 193 49 W. R. 394 1 135 Walker, Re [1905] i Ch. 160 74 L. J. Ch. 86 91 L. T. 713 53 W. R. 177 C. A. .26, 917, 977 Walker, Re [1908] i Ch. 560 52 Sol. Jo. 77 L. J. Ch. 370 ; 98 L. T. 524 .1. 280 1241, 1242 Walker, Re [1908] 2 Ch. 705 77 L. J. Ch. 755 99 L. T. 469 927 Walker ._(E. V.),s(a2e 0/(1912) 28 T. L. R. 466 ^^^alkero. Baird [1892] A. C. 491 61 L. J. P. C. 92 . 67 L. T. 513 341 Walker .0. Bentley (1852) 9 Hare, 629 735 Walker o. Bradford Old Bank (1884) 12 Q. B. D. 511 ; 53 L. J. Q. B. 280 32
. ;
,
: '
.33 .351
.
'
.......
; ;
. . .
..
.."..
;
;
.
-917
'
W.R.
Walker
,,(
645
37 L. J. Ch. 33 ; 17 L. T. 135 ; ; 59 Walker:!!. Crystal Palace Club [1910] i K. B. 87 Walker v. G. W. Ry, (1867) L. R. 2 Ex. 228 ; 36 L. J. Ex. 123 ; i6 L. T. 327 ; ;''l; ,{,..' . 15W. R. 769 ,. Walker v. Hodgson [1909] i K. B. 239 ; 78 L. J. K. B. 193 : 99 L. T. 902 -o.
'
.........
.
'
16
W. R.
402 458
229
509,
510,5"
Walker Walker
[1907] 2 Ch. 104 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 500 ; 97 L. T. 92 760, 761 a. MSdland Ry. (18S6) 2 T. L. R. 450 ; 14 L. T. 796 ; 55 I,. T. 489'; 822 51 J. P. 116 H. L. (E.) Walker v. Mottram (i88l) 19 Ch. D. 355 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 108 ; 45 L. T. 659 ;
v.
Linom
30
Walker
220.
Walker .OijSojuthall (1887) 56 L.T. 882 Walker c. Witter (1778) I Doug. I Walker a. Yorks &'N. Mid. Ry. (1.853) 2 El. 23L. J. Q. B. 73; 18 Jur..i43; 2W. R. i
..........
3
103
i
M. & G. 557
D. (N. S.)
&
Bl.
.....
750
;
2 C. L. R. 237";
252
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Wallace
v.
ccxxvli
PAGE
7 M.
& W.
264
8 D. P. C. 841
4 Jur. 1064 157 Wallace v. Pomfret (1805) 11 Ves. 542 ; 8 R. R. 241 1281 Wallace v. Universal Automatic Machines Co. [1894] 2 Ch. 547 70 L. T. lou 852; 7 R. 316; I Mans. 315 C. A Waller v. Loch (1881) L. R. 7 Q. B. 619 ; 45 L. T. 242 30 W. R. 18 527 Wallingford v. Mutual Society (1880) L. R. 5 App. Cas. 685 ; 50 L. J. Q. B. 831 49 43 L. T. 258 29 W. R. 81 Wallis V. Hands [1893] 2 Ch. 75 62 L. J. Ch. 586 68 L. T. 428 41 W. R. 612 471 3 R. 351 Wallis V. (Duke of) Portland (1797) 3 Ves. 494 496 Wallis V. Smith (1882) 51 L. J. Ch. 577 ; 46 L. T. 473 121, 138, 139 Wallwyn v. Lee (1803) 9 Ves. 24 7 R. R. 142 557, 765 Walpole V. Orford (1797) 3 Ves. 402 ; 4 R. R. 38 1246 Walrond v. Walroud (1858) 28 L. J. Ch. 97 4 Jur. (N. S.) 1099 7 W. R. 96, 139 33 ; John. 18 Walsh V. (Bishop) Lincoln (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 518 44 L. J. C. P. 244 32 L. T. 471 728 23 W. R. 829 Walsh V. Trimmer (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 208 36 L. J. Q. B. 318 16 L. T. 722; 15 W. R. 1150 73')732 Walsh o. Walley (1874) L. R. 9 Q. B. 367 43 L. J. Q. B. 102 22 W. R. 571 213 Walsh 0. Wallinger (1830) 2 Russ. & M. 78 Taml. 425 9 L. J. (O. S.) Ch. 7 875, 876 Walsh o. Walsh (1695) Pre. Ch. 54 : Eq. Ca. Abr. 24 pi. 7 1308 1 R. 627 62 L. J. P. 88 Walter D. Wallet, The [1893] P. 202 69 L. T. 77^ 494 Walter v. Everard [1891] 2 Q. B. 369 60 L. J. Q. B. 738 65 L. T. 443 39 W. R. 676 55 J. P. 693 21, 217 Walter v. Selfe (1851) 4 De G. & Sm. 315 20 L. J. Ch. 433 15 Jur. 416 393,4' Walter o. Yalden [1902] 2 K. B. 304 71 L. J. K. B. 693 87 L. T. 97 51 W. R. 46 ; 18 T. L. R. 668 650, 763, 766, 847 Walters v. Green [1899] 2 Ch. 696; 68 L. J. Ch. 730; 81 L. T. 151 ; 48 W. R. 23 ; 63 J. P. 742 484 Walters v. Morgan (i86i) 3 De G. F. & J. 718 4 L. T. 758 39, 191 Walters v. Walters (1881) 18 Ch. D. 182 50 L. J. Ch. 819 44 L. T. 769 1380 29 W. R. 888 Walton V. Jacobson (1765) i Hagg. 346 1340 Walton 0. Mascall (1844) 13 M. & W. 452 2 D. & L. 410 14 L. J. Ex. 54 115, 294 131 Walton 0. Walton (1807) 14 Ves. 318 Wandsworth Board v. United Telephone Co. (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 904; 53 L. J. Q. B. 449; 51 L. T. 148; 32 W. R. 776; 48 J. P. 676
.
'
C.
381
v.
(1700) i Salk. 299 Ward's and Knight's Case (1588) i Leon. 231 Ward V. Duncombe [1893] A. C. 369 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 881
Wankford
Wankford
133S, 1339
682
;
69 L. T. 121
42
'
W. R. 59 1 R. 224 Ward V. Eyre (1615) 2 Bulstr. 323 Ward V. Hobbs (1878) 4 App. Cas. 13 73; 27W. R. 114 H. L. (E.) Ward D. Macauley (1791) 4 T. R. 489 Ward B. National Bank of New Zealand
;
"53
937
;
48 L. J. Q. B. 281
40 L. T.
328
382,409
(1883) 8 App. Cas. 755
;
52 L. J.
153,301 7'6
P2
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxxviii
TABLE OF CASES
;,,
Paul (1789) 2 Bro. C. C. 583 . , . . . . izi6 V. Turner (1752) 2,Ves. Sen. 431 923, 1291, 1293 . Wallis [1900] i Q. B. 675 82 L. T. 261 39 69 L. J. Q. B. 423 V. Weeks (1830) 7 Bing. 211 ; 4 Moo. & P. 796; 9 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 6 507 Wardrop, Goods 0/ [19 17] P. 54 86 L. J. P. 37 ; 115 L. T. 720 ; 61 Sol. Jo. 171 1247 ., 33 T. L. R. 133 Ware t). Chappell (1649) Style, 186. . l -.iff 134 .- > .4^2 Ware v. Motor Trades Association (1921) 37 T. L. R. 213 :'... Wareham, 5e [1912] 2 Ch. 312 ; 81 L. J. Ch. 578 107 L. T. 80 56 Sol. Jo. '. 613 C. A1121 Waring 0. Dewberry (1717) cited in R. v. Mann, 2 Stra., at p. 757 1348 Waring o. Ward (1802) 7 Ves. 337 5 R. R. 130 317,828 Warlow c. Harrison (1859) ' El. & El. 295 ; 29 L. J. Q. B. 14 ; 6 Jur. (N. S.) 66; 8 W. R. 95 , Warneford . Thompson (1797) 3 Ves. 513 1410 Warner o. Borsly (1679) 2 Rep. in Cha. 79 929 Watner . Riddiford (1858) 4 C. B. (N. S.) 180 . 440 Warren v. Kslson (1858) i Sw. & Tr..290 ; 28 L. J.: P. 122 5 jur. (N. S.) 415; 7W. R. 348 1351 Warren. Warren (1834) i C. M. & R. 250; 4 Tyr. 850;. 3 L. J. Ex.
w. St.
; ; .
,
.....
.
,
PAGE
-..
......
.
...
.
.24s
.
'
'.
294
Taunt. 379 Warrick 0. Queen's College, Oxford (1871) L. R. 6,Ch. App. 716 Warrington (? Harrington) p. Wise (1596) 2 RoUe, M. 449, 450.
i).
Warren
Webb
(1808)
Warwick Warwick
v.
Greville (1809)
Phil!.
123
v.
Warwick
....... .......
.
:
-519
391
,'
/f
,-.
6o6'
k// XI
.
C. A.
'
. .
31
;
W.
Wasdale, Re [1899] i Ch. 163 68 L. J. Ch. 117 15 T. L. R. 1154 97 47 W. R. 169 Wason V. Walter;(i868) L. R. 4 Q. B. 73 8 B. & S. 671 : 38 L. J. Q. B. 34 17W. R. 169 19 L. T. 409 509,514,526 Wasserberg, fie [1915] I Ch. 195 112L. T. 242; 59 Sol. 84 L. J. Ch. 214 1291,1292 Jo. 176. Wastneys o. Chappell (1714) 3'Brp. P. C. 50 580,581 Waterer w. Freeman (1620) Hob. 266 : Brownl. 12 ; Noy, 23 . 494 Waterhouse B. Waterhouse (1905) 94 L. T. 133 471 Waterman. 0. Soper (1698) I Ld. Raym. 737 780 Waters, Re (1889) 42 Ch. D.; 517 ; 58 L. J. Ch. 750 61 L. T. 431 ; 38 W. R. 1272 57 Watkin V. Hall (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 396 ; 9 B. & S. 279 ; 37 L. J. Q. B. 125 ; 18L. T. 561 ; 16W. R. 857 . 500,504,507,508,524 Watkins, Ex parte. (1752) 2 Ves. Sen. 470 > 1218 Watkins, Ex parte (1873) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 520 42 L, J. Bky. 50 ; 28 L. T. .' 958 7?3,; 21 W. R. 530 Watkins' Settlement, Re [191 1] i Ch. i ; 80 L. J. Ch. 102 ; 55 Sol. Jo. 63
; ; ; ; ;
R. 520 79 L. T. 520
.......... .....
.
.
..... ...
.
.
,':
'
C. A.
,'
904.
b.
Lee (1839)
M.
& W. 270
7 Dowl. 498
8 L. J.
Ex. z66
3 Jur.
.
Overseers of Milton (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 350 ; 37 L. J. M. C. 73 ; 18L.T. 601 ; i6W. R. 1059 . Watkins o. Scottish Imperial Co. (1889) 23 Q. B. D. 285 ; 58 L. J. Q. B. 495 ; 60 L. T. 639 ; 37 W. R. 670 Watkins v. Vince (1818) z Stark. 368 . . Watling V. Lewis [1911] i Ch. 414 ; 80 L. J. Ch. 242 ; 104 L. T. 132 . .
w.
. . .
'
.......
.
494
616
8
'
24
1415
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
;
CCXXIX
Wat8on,iie(i886)i8Q. B. D. ii6; 56 L. J. Q. B. 78 35W. R. 290; (1887) 57L. T. 215; 35 W. R. 709 19Q. B. D. 234; 56 L. J. Q. B. 619
C.
1347, 1348
44 780 480 74 L. J. P. C. 151 93 L. T. 489 512 D. Macquire (1848) 5 C. B. 836 530 V. Mid-Wales Ry. (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 17 593 ; 36 L. J. C. P. 285 L. T. 94; 15 W. R. 1107 143 Watt 0. Watt [1905] A. C. 115 21 T. L. R. 386 ; 74 L. J. K. B. 438 69 J. P. 449 ; 53 W. R. 547 92 L. T. 480 H. L. 369, 372 Watteau v. Fenwick [1893] i Q. B. 346 67 L. T. 831 41 W. R. 222 56 5 R. 143 55, 229 J. P. 839 Watton V. Watton (1866) L. R. i P. & M. 227 35 L. J. P. & M. 95 ; 14 L. T. 1186,1191 742; 15 W. R. 288 Watts V. Ball (1708) i P. Wms. 108 2 Eq. Cas. Abr. 727 cited 2 Vern. 681 752,
;
Watson
V.
49 L.
J.
Ch. 243
42 L. T. 294
J. P.
537
V.
C.
.......
;
.
'3'3 Eraser (1835) 7 C. & P. 369 7 A. & E. 223 505, 522 ti. Kelson (1870) L. R. 6 Ch. App. 166 40 L. J. Ch. 126 ; 24 L. T. 710 209 19 W. R. 833 Watts V. Shuttleworth (i86i) 7 H. & N. 353 29 L. J. Ex. 229 7 Jur. 10 W. R. 132 (N. S.) 94S 5 L. T. 58 299 Waugh V. Morris (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 202 42 L. J. Q. B. 57 28 L. T. 265 21 W. R. 438 41 Weatherston 0. Hawkins (1786) i T. R. no Weaver o. Bush (1798) 8 T. R. 78 82, 435 Weaver v. Ward (16 16) Hob. 134 Moor. 864 26, 329, 347, 380, 432 Webb's (Jehu) Case (1608) 8 Rep. 45 b. 697 Webb V. Beavan (1883) Q. B. D. 609 52 L, J. Q. B. 544 49 L. T. 201
Watts Watts
V.
.527
47
504, 524
V. V.
De Fox
Beav. 573 Peake's Add. Cas. 167 (1797) 7 T. R. 391 ; 4 R. R. 472 Lawrence (1797) 7 T. R. 398 ; 2 D. P. C. 8i ; I C. & M. 806
1391
421
;
Tyr. 906
V.
414
(1823)
i
Needham
V.
Rhodes (1837)
212
V.
......
3
;
1337
4 Scott, 497
6 L. J. C. P,
Webbs.
237 803
52
A
V.
J.
Q. B. 584
49 L. T.
4321055 580
Webb
Webb
v.
J Q. B. 485 47 L. T. 215 47 A. Webber v. Smith (1689) 2 Vern. 103 114 L. T. 214 ; 60 85 L. J. K. B. 944 Weber, Ex pane [1916] i A. C. 421 80 J. P. 249 Sol. Jo. 306 32 T. L. R. 312 H. L. (E.) Weblin v.. Ballard (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 122 55 L. J. Q. B. 395 54 L. T. 53 2; 450, 5 J- P- 597 34 W. R. 455 Webster . Cecil (1861) 30 Beav. 62 38, B. 73 12 Jur. 243 17 L. J. Q. Webster v. Watts (1847) 11 Q. B. 311
; ;
Webber
J. P.
30
W. R. 866 C.
715 629
31A
451 127
Webster Webster
v. o.
Wedd
C.
V.
Porter [1916] 2 K. B. 91
v,
85 L. J. K. B. 1298
;
115 L. T. 243
A
de Bernardy (1908) 24 T. L. R. 497
25 T. L. R. 21
Wedgerfifild
629, 791
C. A,
499
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxxx
TABLE OF CASES
;
C. A. ; [1908] A. C. 323 ; 77 L. J. K. B. 847 ; 99 L. T. 210 J. P. 417 ; 24 T. L. R. 771 ; 25 Sol. Jo. 620 ; 6 L. G. R. 924 Weedqp v. Timbrell (1793) 5 T. R. 357
.
43
72
.
398
471
Weekes' Settlement, Re [1897] I Ch. 289 66 L. 45 W. R. 265 Weekly v. Wildman-(i698) i Ld. Raym. 405
;
J.
Ch. 179
76 L. T. 112
.
717
Birch (1894) 69 L. T. 759 550,811 . Goode (1859) 6 C. B. N.'S. 367 967 v. Tibold (1605) i RoUe Ab. 6 33, 86 Weinberg . Ogdens (1905) 22 T. L. R. 58 C. A,: 141 Weir Hospital Case [19 10] 2 Ch. 124 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 722 102 L. T. 26 T. L. R. 519; 54 Sol. Jo. 600 C. A. 1112 Welch V. National Cycle Co. (1886) W. N. 96 lOII Welcome v. Upton (1840) ,6 M. & W. 536 7 Dowl. 475 9 L. J. Ex. '54 679 Weld 0. Hornby (1806) 7 East, 195 701 Weld-Blundell v. Stevens [1920] A. C. 956 89 L. J. K. B. 705 64 Sol. Jo. 529 ; 36 T. L. R. 640-H. L. (E.) 337, 369 Weldono. De Bathe (1884) 54 L.J. Q.B. 113; 14Q. B. D. 339; 53 L. T. 520 ; W. R. 328 33 525 Wellaway o. Courtier (1917) 62 Sol. Jo. 161 381 34 T. L. R. 115 Wellesley . (Duke of) Beaufort (1827) 2 Russ. i 2 Bligh. (N. S.) 124 ; (1831) 2 R. & M. 639 1214, 1215, 1220. 1230 , Wellesley v. Mornington (1855) 2 K. & J. 143 i Jur. (N. S.) 1202 871 Wellocko. Hammond (1590) Cro. Eliz. 204 664 Wells . Foster (1841) 10 L. J. Ex. 216 8 M. & W. 149 5 Jur. 464 95 Wells . Head (1831) 4 C. & P. 568 361 Wells 0. Kingston-tapon-HuU (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 402 44.L. J. C. P, 257 32 L. T. 615 ; 23 W. R. 562 Wells V. Ody (1836) 5 L. J. Ex. 199 i M. & W. 452 : 2 Gale, 12 5 D. P. C, ; I Tyr. & G. 715 7 Car. & P. 410 95 391 Wells o. Smith [1914] 3 K. B. 722 iii L. T. 83 L. J. K. B. 1614 30 T. L. R. 623 539 Welsh o. Welsh (1852) i Drew. 64 1233 B. 836; i C. L. R. 592 Wenman v. Ash (1853) 13 C. 22 L. J. C. P. 190 17 Jur- S79 ; I W. R. 452 595 Wenmoth's Estate, Re (1887) 37 Ch. D. 266 57 L. J. Ch. 649 57 L, 36 W. R. 409 1287 709 Wennallo, Adney (1802) 3 Bos. &P. 247; 6 R. R. 780 209 Wennhak v. Morgan (1888) 20 Q. B. D. 635 57 L. J. Q. B. 241 59 L. T. 28 52 J. P. 470 36 W. R. 697 505 Wernher, Re [1918] 2 Ch. 82 87 L. J. Ch. 372 n8 L. T. 388 62 Sol. Jo, T. L. R. 391 C. A 503 ; 34 125s West, Ex parte (1784) i Bro. C. C. 575 i P. Wms. 275 1289 West, Re [1909] 2 Ch. 180 L. J. Ch. 559 loi L. T. 375 78 1268 West V. Baxendale (1850) 9 C. B. 141 19 L. J. C. P. 149 442 West . Errissey (1726) 2 P. Wms. 349 655 West o. Gwynne [1911] 2 Ch. I 631 West V. Smallwood (1838) 3 M. & W. 418 6 Dowl. 580 7 L. J. Ex. 144 440 West . Treude (1630) Cro. Car. 187 764 West V. Williams [1899] i Ch. 132; 68 L. J. Ch. 127; 79 L. T. 575 47 W. R. 308 C. A. 817,827
o.
.
.......
; ; ; ; . ; ;
.....
.
........
; ;
.
...... .......
;
;
Westburne
0.
Mordant (1590)
......
;
305
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Western
v.
;
ccxxxi
[1897]
C-A
551
; ;
.
Western Wagon Co. v. West [1892] i Ch. 271 61 L. J. Ch. 244 66 L. T. 402; 40W. R. 182 West Ham (Charity, etc.) 0. East London Waterworks [1900] i Ch. 624 69 L. J. Ch. 257 ; 82 L. T. 85 ; 48 W. R. 284 West Ham Guardians v. Bethnal Green [1896] A. C. 477 65 L. J. M. C.
;
201
785
75 L. T. 286 ; 60 J. P. 240 ; Westlake o. Adams (1858) 27 L. J. C. P. 271 (N. S.) 1021 201
West Leigh
Colliery Co.
..........
;
5 C.
B. N.
.
S.
248
.
4 Jur.
.
"
985
94
373
8
Westman v. 24 W. R. 405
Westmeath
.
Salisbury (1831) 5 Bligh. N. S. 340 42 Westminster 0. Gerrard (1632) 2 Bulstr. 346 1210,1213 West of England Bank, Re (1879) '^ Ch. D. 823 ; 48 L. J. Ch. 604 41 L. T. 27 ; 27 W. R. 869 1388 West of England Fire Insce. Co. v, Isaacs [1897] i Q. B. 226 ; 66 L. J. Q. B. 36 ; 75 L. T. 564 C. A 307, 318
;
..... .....
.
,
45
L. J.
Ex. 327;
Weston's Case (1576) 3 Dyer 347 a. Weston, Re [1900] 2 Ch. 164"; 69 L. 467 Weston, Re [1902] i Ch. 680 71 L. 294; 18 T. L. R. 326
;
. .
727
;
J.
Ch. 555
82 L. T. 591 86 L. T. 551
.
48
50
W.
R.
1147
J. Ch.
.
343
.
W. R.
;
939,983,1292,1293
Q. B.
;
Westwick
v.
Theodor (1875)
23
L. R. 10 Q. B. 224
v.
44 L.
J.
no
J.
32
L. T. 696.;
W. R. 620
Coleridge [191
;
1]
1 122; 18 Manson, 307 105 L. T. 215 Wetdrillc. Wright (1814) 2 Phill. 243 Wetzlar v. Zachariah (1867) 16 L. T. 432 Whale V. Booth (1785) 4 T. R. 625 n.
......
2 K. B. 326
.219
93 1340 489
80 L.
K; B.
483
n.
Whaley, iJ<;[i908] 1 Ch. 615; 77L. J. Ch. 367; 98 L. T. 556 1356 Whalley v. L. & Y. Ry. (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 131 53 L. J. Q. B. 285 ; 50 L. T. 772 472; 48 J. P. 500 ; 32W. Rj7ii C. A. * Wharton v. Naylor (1848) 12 Q. B. 673 ; 6 D. & L. 136 17 L. J. Q. B. 278 ; 12 Jur. 894 971, 972 6 L. J. Ch. 195 i Jur. 133 .1101 Wheatley v. Purr (1837) i Keen, 551 Wheatley . Wheatley (1814)2 Haggj Con. 175 1170 Wheaton e. Maple & Co. [1893] 3 Ch. 48 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 963 69 L. T. 203 41W. R. 677 851,852,853,857 Wheelero. Montefiore (1841)2 Q.B. 133; i 0. & D. 493 ; 11 L. J. Q. B. 34 410 6 Jur. 299 Wheeler o. Morris (1914) 84 L. J. K. B. 1435 "3 L- T. 644 C. A. Wheeler o. Thorogood (1589) Cro. Eliz. 127 . Wheeler o. Whiting (1840) 9 C. & P. 262 Whidborne e. Ecclesiastical Commissioners (1877) 7 Ch. D. 375 ; 47 L.
.
.
...........
;
4 Dougl. 36 n.
2 R. R.
.
1406
...........
.
....
.
. . .
129
37 L. T. 346
V.
:
Whincup
74
;
Hughes (1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 78 ; 40 L. J. C. P. 104 ; 24 19 W. R. 439 Whistler's Case (161 3) 10 Rep. 63 a . Whistler v. Webster (1794) 2 Ves. Jr. 367 ; 2 R. R. 260 Whiston's Settlement [1894] i Ch. 661 5 63 L. J. Ch. 273 ; 70 L. T. 681
42
W, R, 327; 8R-
175
7H
ccxxxii
'
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
; ;
'4
Whitaker, Re [igoi] i Ch. 9 70 L. J. Ch. 6 83 L. T. 449 ; 49 .. i7T.;L. R.:24' 1. , Whitbourne v. Williams [1901] 2 K. B. 723 70 L. J. K. B. 933
.
W. R.
;
106
1.
271
'.
Whitbread Whitbread
East, 522 597 & Co. t'. Watt [1901] iCh. 911 ; 70 L. J. Ch. 515 ; 84L.T.419; 49 W. R. 534 ; [1902] I Ch. 835 ; 71 L. J. Gh. 424 ; 86 L. T. 395 ; 50 -5 '5 W. R. 442; 18T. L. R. 465 . 119,840 Whitby V. Mitchell (1890) 44 Ch. D. 85 ; 59 L. J. Ch. 485 ; 62 L. T. 771 ; 38 W. R. 337 66i Whitby o. Roberts (1825) McCle. &Yo. 118 408,411 Whitby o. Van Luedecke [1906} i Ch. 783 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 359 ; 94 L. T. 432 ;
v.
Jenney (1804)
......
.
. 1388, 85 L. T.
.
1389
466
Cavanagh [1902] A. C. 117 71 L. J. K. B. 400 85 L. T. 349; 50 W. R. 218 ; 9 Manson, 351 White's and Hindle's Contract, In re (1877) 7 Ch. D. 201 47 L. J. Cfa. 85
v.
;
.
654,662
;
.
542
37 L. T. 574 26 W. R. 124 White's Charities, i?e [1893] I Ch. 659 White o. Bayley (1861) 10 C, B. N. S. 227
;
656 77&
30 L. J. C. P. 253
;
948
Beetpn (1861) 7 H. & N. 42 30 L. J. Ex. 373 7 Jur. (N. S.) 735 4L. T. 474; 9W. R. 751 Wjhite V, Bluett (1853) 23 L. J. Ex. 36 ; 2 C. L. R. 301 2 W. R. 75 White 0/ Coleman (1673) I Freem. 134 White V. James (No. 2) (1858) 26 Beav. 191 ; 28 L. J. Ch. 179 ; 4 Jur. (N. S.) .:; 1214; 7W. R. 35
.643
13s
White
V.
White V, (Lady) Lincoln (1803) 8 Ves. 363 ; 7 R. R. 71 . Whiteo. Mellin[i895]A. G. 154; 64 L. J. Ch. 308 11R.141; 72
. ;
L. T. 334
.
5
.
.,
16 Jur. 500
i
White White
V.
36 T. L. R. 849
;
[1921]
Ch.
338,
.
410
480
C. A.
V,
Spettigue (184,5) 13 M.
& W.
.
;
603
.
i
.
Car.
_
&
.
331 White, o..Stenning [1911] 2 K. B. 418 80 L. J. K. B. 1124 27 T. L. R. 395 C. A. 55 Sol. Jo. 441 1054 White V, Siimmers [1908] 2 Ch. 256 77 L. J. Ch. 506 ; 98 L. T. 845 24 .1 T. L. R. 552657 White V. Tyndall (1888) 13 App. Cas. 263 ; .57 L. J. C. P. 1 14 ; 58 L. T. 741 ; J.).' 52J. P. 675H.iL.(Ir.) 153,155,157 Whitehall 0. Squire (1691) i Salk. 295 1347 Whitehead, Re [1913] 2 Ch. 5,6 82 L: J. Ch. 302 108 L. T. 368 ; 57 Sol. Jo. 1266 323 Whitehead o. Palmer [1908] i K. B. 151 77 L. J. K. B. 60 ; 97 L. T. 909 ;
.
...,:
3
.
K. 673
. ;
14 L. J. Ex.
.
K. B. 340
.
82 L. J. K. B. 846
.
...
.
477
.......
. . .
24!. L.R.
Whitehtiuse
v.
41
>l
.11..
1341,1366
372 1112
Fellowes (1861) lo C. B.-N. S. 765 ; 30 L. J. C. P. 306 ; 4 L. T. . . . 177; 9W. R.:557'. Whiteley, iJe (1911) 55 SoL Jo. 291 Whiteley v. Adams. (1863) 15 C. B. N. S. 392 ; 33 L. J. C' P. 89 ; 10 Jur; (N. S.)47.o; 9L-T.483; i2iW. R. 153 . . Whiteley 0. Delaney![i9i4] A. C. 132 ; 83 L. J. Ch. 349 : 116 L. T. 434 ; 58
>
;
.5,8
Sol. Jo.
2j8H.
L..
(E.)
.830
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
CCXXXIU'
Whiteley v. Hilt [1918] 2 K. B. 808 ; 87 L. J. K. B. 1058 ; 62 Sol. Jo. 717 34 T. L. R. 592 C. A. 95 Whiteley v. Learoyd (18S6) 33 Ch. D. 347 1113 Whiteley v. Pepper (1877) 2 Q. B. D. 276 ; 46 L. J. Q. B. 436 36 L. T. 588 25 W. R. 607 355 Whitfield, Re [191 1] i Ch. 310 ; 80 L. 103 L. T. 878 27 T. L. R, J. Ch. 263 55S0L Jo. 237 203; "74 Whitfield V. Bewit (1724) 2 P. Wms. 240 786, 789 Whitfield V. Despeneer (1778) 2 Cowp. 765 429 Whitfield v. S. E. Ry. [1838) E. B. & E. 115 27 L. J. Q. B. 229 4 Jur, ' (N. S.) 688 6 W. R. 545 11,521 Whitgift o. Barrington (1622) Winch, 31 763 Whiting o. Burke (1870) L. R. JO Eq. 539 ; 6 Ch. App. 342 297 Whitley !). Roberts (1825) McCle. & Yo. 107 924 Whitmore-Searle v. Whitmore-Searle [1907] 2 Ch. 332 76 L. J. Ch. 576 97
. . . .
...
.'
;_
L. T. 160
568
(1890) 45 Ch. D. 320
;
Whittaker
v.
Kershaw
60 L.
39 W. R. 23 C. A Whittingham's Case (1603) 8 Rep. 42 b Whittington v. Gladwin (1826) 5 B. & C. 180 Whittle V. Henning (1848) 18 L. J. Ch. 51 ; 2 Ph. 731 12 Jur. 1079 Whitwood Chemical Co. v. Hardman [1891] 2 Ch. 416 ; 60 L. J. Ch. 428 64 L. T. 716 ; 39 W. R. 433 C. A Whitworth v. Hall (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 695 9 L. J, (O. S.) K. B. 297
. ; ;
J.
Ch. 9
63 L. T. 203
i,
490
Wickham
583
;
v.
Hawker
(1840) 7
673, 722
1191 1201 34 T. L. R. 447 C. A Wicks !!. Fenthani (1791) 4 T. R. 247 49 Wiehe . Dennis (1913) 29 T. L. R 250 204 Wigford V. Gill (1591) Cro. Eliz. 269 398 Wiggan 0. Branthwaite (1699) 12 Mod. 259 700 Wigglesworth 0. Dallinson (1779) i Dougl. 201 624 Wigmore v. Jay (1850) 5 Exch. 354 19 L. J. Ex. 300 14 Jur, 837 449 Wilbraham . Snow (1670) 2 Wms. Saund. 47 410, 414 Wilby V. West Cornwall Ry. (1858) 27 L. J. Ex. 181 2 H. & N 703 ; 4 Jur. 6 W. R. 225 (N. S.) 284 250 Wilcox V. Steel [1904] i Ch. 212 73 L. J. Ch. 217 89 L. T. 640 ; 68 J. P. 146C. A 695 Wild's Case (1599) 6 Rep. 16 b 562, Wild V. Harris (1849) 18 L. J. C. P. 297 7 C. B. 999 7 D. & L. 114; 13
.
Sol. Jo.
Jur. 961
. Wilde V. Minsterley (1639) i RoUe Ab. 565 Wilkes B. Hungerford Market Co. (1835) 2 Bing. N. C. 281 Wilkes . Spooner [1911] 2 K. B. 473 80 L. J. K. B. 1107 27 T; L. R. 426 C. a. 55 Sol. Jo. 479
; ; . . . . .
........
; ;
. . .
104 L. T. 911
757,804,
141
870 Wilkie o. Holme (1752) i Dick. 165 Wilkins V. Carmichael (1779) i Doug. loi 964, 968 61 Sol. Jo. 117 L. T. 81 Wilkinson, Re [1917] i Ch. 620 86 L. J. Ch. 511 . 1242 414 33 T. L. R. 267 1274 Wilkinson v. Adam (1813) i Ves. & B. 452 12 R. R. 255 1218 Wilkinson v. Boulton (1665) i Lev. 162 221, 228 Wilkinson v. Coverdale (1793) i Esp. 74 Wilkinson 0. Downton [1897] 2 Q. B. 57 66 L. J. Q. B. 493 76 L. T. 493 45 W.R. 525 445,454,523
; ; ; ; .
...
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxxxiv
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
; ;
Wilkinson
Gibson (1867) L. R. 4 Eq. 162 36 L. J. Ch. 646 ; 16 L. T. 733 15W. R. 983 1316 Wilkinson . Hall (1837) 3 Bing. (N. C.) 508 ; 4 Scott, 301 3 Hodges, 56 ; 6 L. J. C. P. 82 622 Wilkinson 0. Haygarth (1847) 12 Q. B. 837 16 L. J. Q. B. 103 11 Jur 104 387 Wilkinson v. Johnson (1824) 3 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 58 ; 5 D. & R. 403 3 B. * & C. 429 149 Wilkinson 0. Lindo (1840.) 7 M. &W. 81 158 Wilkinson v. Lloyd (1845) 7 Q- ^- ^7 '4 L- J. Q. B. 165 ; 9 Jur. 328 320 Wilkinson v. Oliveira (1835) i Scott, 461 i Bing. (N. C.) 490 94 Wilkinson . Parry (1828) 4 Russ. 272 1109 Wilkinson. Proud (1843) II M. &W. 33 12 L. J. Ex. 227 ; 7 Jur. 284 719 Wilkinson v. Verity (1871) L.. R. 6 C. P. 206 40 L. J. C. P. 141 24 L. T. R. 604 204, 422 32 ; 19 W. Wilkinson) v. Wilkinson (1871) L. R. 12 Eq. 604 40 L. J. Ch. 242 24 L. T. 314; 19 W. R. 558 1179 Wilks o. Groom (1856) 3 Drew. 584 25 L. J. Ch. 724 ; 2 Jur (N. S.) 681 4 W. R. 697 1404 Willans v. Taylor (1829) 7 L. J. (O. S.) C. P. 250 ; 6 Bing. 183 3 Moo. & P. 350 49") 492) 493 Willatts V. Kennedy (1831I 8 Bing. 5 i M. & Scott, 35 94 Willcock 11. Terrell (1878) 3 Ex. D. 323 39 L. T. 84 C. A. . 999 Willi 0. St. John [1910] I Ch. 325 L. J. Ch. 239 io2 L. T. 383 26 79 T. L. R. 405 ; 54 Soil Jo. 269 806 Willeters. Dobie (1856) 2 K. & J. 647; 4 W. R. 669 .'1182 WilUts 0. Green (1850) 3 C. & K. 59 214 Willett B.Winnell (t687) I Vern. 488 . Williams' iEstate, Re (1872) L. R. 15 Eq. 270 ; 42 L. J. Ch. 158 28 L. T. 17 1376 61 L. T. 58 Williams, i?e (1889) 42 Ch. D. 93 : 58 L. J. Ch. 451 869 Williams, He [1897] 2 Ch. 12 66 L. J. Ch. 485 76 L. T. 600 45 W. R. 519 C. A. 1097 Williams, iJc [1904] i Ch. 52 73 L. J. Ch. 82 89 L. T. 580 50 W. R. 318 .20T. L. R. 54 . 1373,1379,1380 Williams, Re [1915] i Ch. 450 no L. T. 569 84 L. J. Ch. 578 1279 Williams o. Arkle (1875) L. R. 7 H. L. 606 45 L. J. Ch. 590 ; 33 L. T. 187 24W. R. 215 1305 Williams v. Ashton (i860) i J. & H. 115 3 L. T. 177 1253 i H. L. C. 200 Williams -v. Bayley (1866) L. R. 35 L. J. Ch. 717; 12 Jur. (N. S.) 875 ; 14 L. T. 802 37 Williams v. (Duke of) Bolton (1784) i Ves. Sen. 545 668 Williams . Bosanquet (1819)1 B. & B. 238; 3 Moore, 500; 21 R. R. 585 610, 611, 629 Williams v. Carwardine (1833) i N. & M. 418 ; 4 B. & Ad. 621 ; 5 Car. & P. 566 2 L. J. K. B. loi 91 Williams . Eady (1893) 10 T. L. R. 41 C. A. 333 Williams, o. Gesse (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 849 7 Car. & P. 777 5 Scott, 56 3 Hodges, 131 420 Williams v. G. W. Ry. (1874) L. R. 9 Exch. 157 ; 43 L. J. Ex. 105 31 L. T. 124 22 W. R. 531 334 Williams v. Groucott (1863) 4 B. & S. 149 32 L. J. Q. B. 237 ; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 1237; 8L. T. 458; II W. R. 886 Williams v. Hensman (1861) i J. & H. 546 30 L. J. Ch. 878 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 771 5 L. T. 203 1092 Williams v. James (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 577 708 Williams V. Jones (1826) j B. c& C. 108 ; 7 D. & R. (K. B.) 549 ; 29 R. R. 18I 267
i).
;
...........
;
;
... .......
; ; ; ; ;
......... ...........
; ; ;
.831
.
...
.......... ....
;
....
;
'
.784
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Williams Williams Williams Williams Williams Williams Williams
v. v.
ccxxxv
& W. 628 ; 2 D. & L. 680 ; 14 L. J. Ex. 145 (1873) ^8 L. T. 232 ; 21 W. R. 386 v. Millington (1788) i H. Bl. 181 ; 2 R. R. 724 . v. Morgan [1906] i Ch. 804 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 480 ; 94 L. T. 473 v. Moss Empires [191 5] 3 K. B. 242 ; 84 L. J. K. B. 1767 ; 1 13 L. T. 560; 31 T. L. R. 463
Jones (1845) 13 M.
Mason
323 350
65
830
145
IJ.
530 225
v. North's Navigation Collieries [1906] A. C. 136; 75 L. J. K. 334 ; 94 L. T. 447 ; 54 W. R. 485 70 J. P. 217 Williams v. Ocean Colliery Co. [1907] 2 K. B. 422 76 L. J. K. B. 1073 L. T. 150; 23 T. L. R. 584 Williams v. Scott [1900] A. C. 499 69 L. J. P. C. 77 82 L. T. 727 W. R. 33 16 T. L. R. 450 Williams v. Smith (1888) 22 Q. B. D. 134 58 L. J 21 59 L, T. 757 ;
; ; . ; ; ;
.
97
462
49
1125
37
W. R. 93 ; 52 J. P. 823 505, 508 Williams e. Sorrell (1799) 4 Ves. 389 142 Williams v. Stern (1879) 5 Q- ^- ^- 49 49 L- J- Q B. 663 42 L. T. 719 28 W. R. 901 C. A 145 >oo L. T. 630 Williams o. Thomas [1909] i Ch. 713 78 L. J. Ch. 473 1320 Williams v. Williams (18 10) 12 East, 209 563 Williams v. Williams (1882) 20 Ch. D. 659 51 L. J. Ch. 385 46 L. T. 275 1402 46 J. P. 726 30 W. R.'438 15 Cox, C. C. 39 Williams v. William^ ['9] Ch. 152 69 L. J. Ch, 77; 81 L. T. 804; 48 W. R. 245 1393 1281 Williamson v. Naylor (1834) 3 Y. & Coll. (Ex.) 208 Willion V. Berkley (1562) i Plowd. 223 813 Willis, Re [1902] i Ch. 15 50 W. R. 70 ; 85 L. T. 43671 L. J. Ch. 73
.
C.
A.
1
;
130
Willis V.
61 L. J. Q. B. 769
.
69 L. T. 206
Willis
40 VV. R. 597 V. Jermin (1589) Cro. Eliz. 167 WiUis V. Willis (1865) 34 Beay. 340 34 L. J. Ch. 313 ; 13 W. R. 77 i Moore, 133 18 R.R. 525 Willison V. Patteson (18 17) 7 Taunt. 439 103 L. T. 447 Willmott V. London Road Car Co. [1910] 2 Ch. 525
; ;
;
66
811
20,
1324 31A
631 223
27
.
T. L. R. 4;
Willoughby, Ex Willoughby, Re W. R. 850C. A. Willoughby v. Willoughby (1787) i T. R. 763 Wills V. Murray (1850) 19 L. J. Ex. 209 4 Ex. 843 65 L. J. Q. B. 474 Willson V. Love [1896] i Q. B. 626 W. R. 450 C. A
; ;
55 Sol. Jo. 873 parte (1881) 16 Ch. D. 604 ; 44 L. T. iii (1885) 30 Ch. D. 324 ; 54 L. J. Ch. 1122 ;
R. 935 53 L. T. 926 33
29
W.
1232
756
III
;
74 L. T. 580
;
44
39
Willyams
v.
BuUmore
9 L. T. 216
32 Beav. 574
41,42 9 Jur. (N. S.) 115; iiW. R. 506 89 L. T. i Wilmer's Trusts, Re [1903] 2 Ch. 411 72 L. J. Ch. 670 I 1074 C. A. Wilmer's Trusts, Re [1910] 2 Ch. iii 79 L. J. Ch. 617; 102 L. T. 5641 568, 661 723 1050 Wilmot V. Alton [1897] i Q. B. 17 45 W. R. 1 13 ; 4 Mans. 17 C. A. 756 Wilmoto. Pike (1845) 5 Hare, 14; 9 Jur. 839 Wilson's Estate, Re (1863) 3 De G. J. & S. 410 ; 32 L. J. Ch. 191 7 L. T. 722 ; 596 u W. R. 294 13 L. T. 576 ; Wilson's Trusts, Re (1865) L. R. i Eq. 247 35 L. J. Ch. 243 sub nom. Shaw v. Gould (l868) 14 W, R. 161 12 Jur. (N. S.) 132 117? Ch. 433 ; 18 L. T. 833 L. R. 3 H. L. 55 37 L.
; ;
'
J.
Digitized
by Microsoft
CCXXXVl
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
the Goods, of {iM6)h.R. I P. . (1878) 8 Ch. D. 364 C. A.
WOsoa, In WUson, Re
Wilson, Wilson,
&D.z6c)
.
'
.1238
366
Re [1907] i Re [1916]!
;
,
76 L.
J.
;
;
1121, 1122 32 T. L. R.
.
. . ^320 150 ; 60 Sol. Jo. 190 :; . . . Wilson O.Allen (1820) I J. & W. 611 ; 21 R. R. 255 Wilson . Brett (1843) II M. & W. 113 ; 12 L. J. Exl 264 199,204,331 Wilson V. Finch-Hatton (1877) 2 Ex. D. 336 ; 46 L. J. Ex. 489 ; 36 L. T. 473 ; . . . 636 25 W. R. 537 ' Wilson II. Fuller (1843) 3Q.'B. 68, 1009; 3 G. cSsD. 570 54' Wilson V. Glossop (1888) 20 Q. B. D. 354 ; 57 L. J. Q. B. i6i ; 58 L. T. 707 ; 36 W. R. 296 ; 52 J. P. 246' 57 Wilson V. Hodson (1872) L. R. 7 Exch. 84; 41 L. J. Ex. 49 ; 20 W. R. .' . . . , ,. . . 438 1345 Wilson V. London Navigation Co. (1865) L. R. i C. P. 61 ; 35 L. J. C. P. 9 ; 13L. T. 435; 12 Jur, (N. S.) 52 ; i H. & R. 29 ; 14W. R. loi . 135 Wilson . Madkreth (1766) 3 Burr. 1824 3261 381 Wilson B. Maddison (1843) 2 Y. & CoU. C. C. 372 ; 12 L. J. Ch. 420 ; 7 Jur.
.605
'. . . 1272 572 Wilson 0. Merry (18.68) i H. L. Sc. 326 448 Wilson V. Queen's Club [1891] 3 Ch. 522 ; 60 L. J. Ch. 698 ; 65 L. T. 42 40 W. R. 172 Wilson V. Phillips (1824) 2 Bing. 13 633 Wilson V. Robinson (1845) 7 Q- ^- ^8 14 L. J. Q. B. 196 ; 9 Jur. 726 527 Wilson V. Sewell (1766) 4 Burr. 1979 36 Wilson o. Strugnell (i88i) 7 Q. B. D. 548 ; 50 L. J. M. C. 145 ; 45 L. T. 218 ., . 14 Cox, C. C. 624; 45 J. P. 831 43 Wilson 0. Tumman (1843) 12 L. J. C. P. 306 6 M. & G. 236 6 Scott, N. R. . .54, 35. 531 894; iDow. &L. 573 Wilson V. Waddell (1876) L. R. 2 App. Cas. 95 ; 35 L. T. 639 783 Wilson V. Wilson (1872) L. R. 2 P. & M. 435 ; 41 L. J. P. & M. 74 ; 27 L. T. 20 W. R. 891 1204 351 Wilson V. Wilson [191 1] i K. B. 327 80 L. J. K. B. 296 ; 104 L. T. 96 ; 18 . Manson, i8 . 1380 Wilton's Settled Estates, Re [1907] i Ch. 50 ; 76 L. J. Ch. 37 ; 96 L. T. 193 ?3 T. L. R. 64 887 Wiltshire o. Sidford (1827); i Man. & R. (K. B.) 404 780' 18 L. T. 38 Wilts. Iron Co. (1868) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 443 ; 37 L. J. Ch. 554 13' 16W. R. 682 Wily 11. Wily [1918] P. i 87 L. J. P. 31 117 L. T. 703 ; 62 Sol. Jo. 55 34 T. L. R. 33 ._ 1179 Wimbledon Conservators o. Dixon (1875) i Ch. D. 362 45 L. J; Ch. 353 ; '; 33 L. T. 679; 24 W. R. 466 C..A. 708 Wimbledon Local Board o. Underwood [1892] i Q. B. 836 61 L. J. Q. B. ./ 67 L. T. 55 40 W. R. 640 56 J. P. '633 952 484 Winans o. A.-G. [1904] A. C. 287 73 L. J. K. B. 613 90 L. T. 721 ; 20 T. L. R. 510 . 2 Winchester (Bishop of) o. Knight (1717) i P. Wms. 406 584, 592 Winohilsea's Trusts, Re (1888) 39 Ch. D. 168 58 L. J.^Ch. 20 59 L. T. 167 . 1120 37 W. R. 77 Windham's (Justice) Case (1589) 5 Rep. 7 a 1094 Windham . Clere (1589) Cro. Eliz. 130 i Leon. 187 489 Windhill L. B. of'Health v. Vint'(i89o) 45 Ch. D. 351 59 L. J. Ch. 608 63 L. T. 366 ; 38 W. R. 738 17 Cox, C. C. 41 42 Wing 0. Angrave (i860) 8 H. L. C. 183 30 L. J. Ch. 65 . 4
.
'
.......
. . . .
...
.834
. .
....
; .
:
.......
; .
.
...... ....
; . . ;
....
; , ;
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Wing
Taylor (1861) 2 Sw. 583 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 737
V.
CCXXXVll
PAGE
&
Tr. 278
30 L.
;
J.
P.
M. & A. 258
;
4 L. T.
1157,
1173
(1886) 11 P. D. 81
55 L. J. P. 7
50 J. P. 56
34
1258 Winkfield, The [1902] P. 42 ; 71 L. J. P. D. & A. 21 ; 85 L. T. 688 ; 18 T. L. R. 178 ;. 50 W. R. 246 ; 9 Asp. M. L. C. 259 C. A. 412, 417, 921 Winn, Re [1910] i Ch. 278 ; 79 L. J. Ch. 165 ; loi L. T. 737 . 1286 . Winn V. Ingilby (iSii) 5 B. & Aid. 625 . . Winn V. Littleton (1689) i Vern. 3 818 .
Winsmore
Winstone
126
v.
o.
Winter
v.
117
Winter v. Mouseley (1819) 2 B. & Aid. 802 Winterbottomo. (Lord) Derby (1867) L. R. 2 Ex. L. T. 771; 16W. R. 15 Winterbottom v. Wright (1842) 10 M. & W. 109
. . . .
............ ...........
;
&
....788 ......
.
'
470
219 840
R. 465 Sim.
.
L. J. (O. S.)
K.
&
S.
434
27 R.
.
R
i
31
36
L. J.
.991
400
Ex. 194
L./
Ex. 415
329. 336
Winterboume
v.
Morgan
533
436
;
R. 129 Wise V. Perpetual Trusted Co. [1903] A. C. 139 72 L. J. P. C. 31 87 L. t" 19 T. L. R. 125 569 ; 51 W. R. 241 Wiseman v. Denham (1623) Godb. 330 Witham v. Bland (1674) 3 Swanst. 277, n. Withers v. Iseham (1552) Dyer, 70 a B. 30 : L. Withers v. Reynolds (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 882 J, K. Withey v. Cottle (1823) Turn. & R. 78 ; i L. J. (O, S.) Ch. 117 Withrington v. Banks (1725) Sel. Ca. Cha. (Macnaghten) 92 Witt, Re (1876) 2 Ch. D. 489 ; 45 L. J. Bky. 118; 34 L. T. 785 ; 24 W. R,
5
; ; i . ; .
W.
...
26
J. L. Ch. 218
3 Jur,
1278
49 822 962
891C. A
10 L. J. C. P. 303 ; 3 Scott, Wollaston v. Hakewill (1841) 3 Man. & Gr. 297 N. R. 593 Wollaston v. King (1869) L. R. 8 Eq. 165 38 L. J. Ch. 392 ; 20 L. T. 1003 17 W. R. 641 Wohnershausen v. Gullick [1893] 2 Ch. 514; 62 L. J. Ch. 773 ; 68 L. T,
; ;
1366
1278
753 Woltereck
295, 301
v.
;
81 L. J. P. 145
107 L. T. 27
;
28
1
191
Emmons [1901] i K. 84 L. T. 407 49 W. R. 553 C A 429 Wolverhampton & Walsall Ry. 0. L. & N. W. Ry.
Wolverhampton Corpn.
43 L.
J.
B. 515
70 L.
J.
K. B.
127
;
Ch. 131
L. J. Bky. 121 ; 30 L. T. 743 ; ; R. 936 Wood, Re [1896] 2 Ch. 596 ; 65 L. J. Ch. 814 ; 75 L. T. 28 44 W. R. 685 . . Wood V. Beard (1876) 2 Ex. D. 30 46 L. J. Q. B. 100 ; 35 L. T. 866 Woodp. Braddick (1808) 1 Taunt. 104; 9 R. R. 711 Wood V. Downes (181 1) 18 Ves. 120; 11 R. R. 160
Wombwell o. Belasyse (1825) 6 Ves, no, n Wood, Re (1874) L. R. 9 Ch. App. 670 43
127 792
22W,
1172
.... ....
;
674 642 76
41
Wood V.
142
(E. of)
;
Wood Wood
n.
o.
Q. B. D. 501
57 L. J. Q. B. 547
59 L. T.
521
.
1244 713
Digitized
by Microsoft
CCXXXVlll
TABLE OF CASES
& W.
S38
;
Wood
.lLcadbitter (1845) 13 M.
.
14 L. J. Ex. 161
9 Jur.
187
Woodo. Lovatt
(1796)
(1839)
.
6T. R.
1 1
.
511
688
;
Wood V. Manley
1028
.
A.
& E.
.
34
3 P.
...
&
D.
9 L. J. Q. B. 27
.
3 Jur.
386
.
o.
0. o.
o.
Rowclifle (1847) 2 Ph. 382 ; Scarth (1855) 2 K. & J. 33 ; Tassell (1844') 6 Q. B. 234
Woodo. Waud
Wood . Wood
.,
"....... ...
.
:
'
39 L. J. Ch. 790
.
23 L. T. 295
18
Woodhouse
;
868, 906,975 Walker (1880) 5 Q. B. D. 404 46 L. J. Q. B. 609 ; 42 L. T. 28 W. R. 765 770 405, 576 44 J. P. 666 Woodhouselee w. Dalrymple (1817) 2 Mer. 419 16 R. R. 193 1274 Woodin, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 309 ; ,64 L. J. Ch. 501 72 L. T. 740 ; 43 W. R.
.
W.
R. 819
v.
615
12 R. 302
C. A.
.
,
Woodland . Mantel (1552) Plowd. 94 Woodley o. Midland Ry. (1887) 2 Ex. D. 384
.
46 L.
;
419C. A
Woodmeston o. Walker (1831) 2 Russ. & M. 197 9 L. Woodson V. Nawton (1727) 2 Stra. 777 Woodwatd, In the Goods 0/(1871) L. R. 2 P. & M. 206
. . .
,
J.
Ex. 521
33[2
257
.
995 412
1248
;i
40 L.J. P. 17
. ;
24
.
L. T.
40;
.
)
19W.
Dowse
R. 448
(1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 722
.
Woodward
(N. S.
31 L. J. C. P. 70
8 Jur.
413 ; 9 W. R. 870 Goulstone (1886) L. R. 11 App. Gas. 469 56 L. J. P. L. T. 790; 35.W. R. 337 Woodwards. Walton. (1807) 2 B. &, P. N. R. 476 Wooldridge . Norris (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 410 16 W. R. 965 WoolleyK. Broad [1892] I Q. B. 806; 66 L. T. 680 40W. R. 511 WooUey v. Clark (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 744 i D. & R. 409 24 R. R. 546
1324
i
;
Woodward
v.
55
1252
.
464
295 1023
135 1170 107 435 1075
1346, 1347,
Neale (1868) 19 L. T. 93 (1796) 6 T. R. 710 ; 2 H. Bl. 574 ; 3 R. R. 323 Worth ti. Terrington (1844) 13 M. & W. 781 14 L. J. Ex. 143 Worthing Corporation o. Heather [1906] 2 Ch. 532 ; 75 L. J. Ch. 761'! 95 L. T. 718; 22T. L. R. 750; 4L.G.R. 1179 .. Worthington v. Curtis (1875) i Ch. D. 419 45 L.J. Ch. 259 33 L. T. 828 ; ; 24 W. R. 221 Worthington . Morgan (1849) 16 Sim. S47 '8 L. J. 233 ; 13 Jur. 316 Wraggo. Denham (18365.2 Y. &C. (Ex.) 117
o.
Wormald
Worsley
v.
Wood
'
.819
322 275
304 759
Wray Wray
>
o. v.
93 L. T. 304
54
W.
R.
136
;
,
Wren
0. Wield (1869) L. R. 4 Q. B. 730 38 L. J. Q. B. 327 ; 20 L. T. 1007 10 B. & S. 51 . , Wright's Trusts, Re (1856) 2 K. & J. 595 ; 25 L. J. Ch. 6?i ; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 465 ; 4 W. R. 541 Wright, In the Goods o/[i893] P. 21 ; 62 L. P. 31 ; 68 L. T. 25 ; 41 W. R.
428
1205 1341
318
Wright,,
R. 476
'.
J.
Re
(1876) 3 Ch. D. 70
977C. A
Wright,
iJc [1906] 2
45 L. J. Bky. 130
35 L. T. 21
24
.
W. R.
Ch. 288
W.
.
.953
R.
.
5'J
'.
1278
Digitized
by Microsoft
TABLE OF CASES
Wright
V.
ccxxxix
PAGE
K. B. 209
78 L. J. K. B. 165
25 T. L. R. 156
Wright Wright
B.
V.
....
Ch. 787
; .
'.
100 L. T. 123
245 96
995
J.
16 Jur.
647
;
Wright o. Colls (1849)80. B. 150; 19L. J. C. P. 60; 13 Jur. 1056 . 320 Wright V. Court (1825) 4 B. & C. 596 6 Dow. & Ry. 623 ; 4 L. J. (O. S.) K. B. 17 .442 Wright . Dowley (1773) 2 W. Bl. 1185 573 Wright V. Laing (1824) 4 D. c& R. 783 ; 3 B. & C. 165 27 R. R. 313. 114 Wright . Leonard (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 258 8 Jur. 30 L. J. C. P. 365
_
(N. S.)4i5; 5 L. T.
t).
Mills (1859) 4
H.
944
V.
Naylor (1820)
V.
V.
348 67 441
361,
1
407
1
L. T.
. .
206; 27
. ;
W. R.
.
562
.
C. A.
V.
149,
;
50
Robotham
R. 668 C. A Sanderson (1884) 9 P. D. 149 32 W. R. 560 C. A J. P. 180 Wright V. Simpson (1802) 6 Ves. 734
55 L. J. Ch. 791
55 L. T. 241
W.
0.
349
;
Wright
Wright Wright
V. V.
8W.
Wright
V.
Snell (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 35C^; 24 R. R. 413 Stavert (i860) 29 L. J. Q. B. 161 ; 2 L. T. 175 R. 413; 6Jur. (N. S.)867
;
.......
;
;
53 L. J. P. 49
50 L. T. 769
48
1238
294
2 El.
& El.
8
721
382
;
710 Wrightson, Re [1904I 2 Ch. 95 73 L. J. Ch. 742 ; 90 L. T. 748 657, 658 Wrigley V. Gill [1905] i Ch. 241 ; 74 L. J. Ch. 160 92 L. T. 49 53 W. R. 334; affirmed [1906] i Ch. 165; 75 L. J. Ch. 210 ; 94 L. T. 174; 54 W. R. 274 820, 821, 831 Wrixon v. Vize (1842) 3 Dr. & W. 104 2 Con. & Law 138 846 Wrotesley o. Adams (1559) Plowd. 187 656,672 Wulff V. Jay (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 756 41 L. J. Q. B. 322 ; 27 L. T. 118 ; 20 W. R. 1030 300 Wyat Wild's Case (1609) 8 Rep. 78 b 675, 676, 680 Wyatt o. Harrison (1832) I L. J. K. B. 237 3 B. & Ad. 871 Wyatt V. Palmer [1899] 2 Q. B. 106 ; 68 L. J. Q. B. 709 80 L. T. 639 ; 47 W. R. 549 487 Wyld V. Pickford (1841) 8 M. & W. 443 4:6 Wylie, Re [1895] 2 Ch. 116 ; 64 L. J. Ch. 613 13 R. 483 1256 43 W. R. 475 Wylie V. Birch (1843) 4 Q- B. 566 ; 12 L. J. Q. B. 260 3 Gal. & D. 629 530 Wyman v. Knight (1888) 39 Ch. D. 165 57 L. J. Ch. 886 59 L. T. 164 37 W. R. 76 379 Wynne v. Cockes (1780) i Bro. C. C. 515 605 Wythes, Re [1893] 2 Ch. 369 ; 62 L. J. Ch. 663 68 L. T. 520 ; 3 R. 433 41 W. R. 375 754 Wythes . Lee (1855) 3 Drew. 396; 26 L. T. 192 840
;
.
Vanderplank (1855) 25 L. J. Ch. 753 2 K. & J. i & G. 133; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 599; 4 W. R. 410 Wright V. Williams (1836) 5 L. J. Ex. 107; i M. & W. 77; 375 ; I Gale, 410
;
De
Tyr.
G. M.
35
&
G.
..........
; .
.
.. ......
; ;
.781
Xenos
o.
800; 16
Wickham (1866) W. R. 38
L. R. 2 H. L. 296
36 L. J. C. P. 313
16 L. T.
Yard
v.
ed.)
....
97
681, 851
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxl
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
849 451 1187 987 534
Yarmouth (Mayor) v. Eaton (1763) 3 Burr. 1402 Yarmouth . France (1887) 19 Q. B. D. 647 57 L. J. Q. B. 7 Yarrow . Yarrow [1892] P. 92 61 L. J. P. 69 66 L. T. 383, Yates V. Aston .(1843) 4Q. B. 182 I2 L. J. Q. B. 160 3 Gale &Dav,
:
;
351
Yates V. Eastwood (i85i)'6 Exch. 805 20 L. J. Ex. 303 . Y. B. 47 Edw. III., Mich. pi. 15 (1374) 477 Y. B. 7 Hen. IV., Mich. pi. 15 (fo. 31) (1405) .482 Y. B. II Hen. IV., Mich. pi. 46 (1409) 465 Y. B. 19 Hen. VI., Mich. pi. 59 (1440) 434 Y. B. 22 Hen. VI., Mich. pi. 54 (1443) 496 Y. B. 9,E(iw. IV., Mich. pi. 4(1469) 475 Y. B. 9 Edw. IV., 35 pi. 10 (1470) 386 Y. B. 13 Edw. IV., fo. 9, pi. 5 (1473) 409 Y. B. 21 Edw. IV., fo. 74, pi. 6 (148 1) 412 Y. B. II Hen. VII., Trin. pi. 7 (fo. 26) (1496) . 482, 487 Y.B. 12 Hen. VII., Trin. pi. 2 (fo. 22 a) (1498) 501 Y. B. 21 Hen. VII., 27 b., p!. 5 (1506) 386 Yellowly . Gower (i8S5) n Exch. 274 24 L. J. Ex. 289 626 Yockney v. Hansard (1844) 3 Ha. 620 8 Jur. 822 .. 1275 B. 215 Yonge V. Toynhep [igip] i 79 L. J. K. B. 208 ; 102 L. T. 57; .
!
C. A,
of)
61
York's (Archbishop
3 Dyer,
.
327 b
Yorke v. Grenaugh (1703) 2 Ld. Raym. 866*, i Salt. 388 Yorkshire Banking Co. v. Beatson (1880) 5 C. P. D. 109 49 L. J. C. 42 L. T. 455 ; 28 W. R. 879 63 Yorkshire Woolcombers, Re [1903] 2 Ch. 284 ; [1904] A. C. 284 1009 Ex parte ; Kitchin, In re (18,81) 17 Ch. D. 668 50 L. J. Ch, 824 Young, 45 L. T. 90 293? 32 Young, i?e [1912] z Ch. 479 81 L. J. Ch. 817 j 107 JL. T. 380 994 Young Sf Co. -0. Bankier Distillery Co. [1893] A. C. 691 '69 L. T. 838 ;58 100 771 J. P. Young o. Cole (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 724; 4 Scott, 489 ; 3 Hodges, i 26; 6 L. J. C. P. 201 229 Young 0. Fowler (1639) Cro. Car. 555 ; W. Jones, 310 900, 901 Young V. Hichens (1844) 6 Q. B. 606 D. & M. 592. 408, 920 Young o. (Mayor, &c.) Leamington (1883) 8 App, Cas. 517 52 L. Q. B. 713; 49L. T. i; 3pW. R. 500 96 Young V. Peachey (1741) 2 Atk. 248 813, 1103 Schuler (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 651 L. T, 546 Young V. 62 49 Young 0. Spence;: (1829) lo B. & C. 145 ; 5 Man. & Ry^ (K. B.) 47 L.J. (O. S.) K. B. 106 790 Young 9. Stoell (1632) Cro. Car. 279 742 Young V. (Lord) Waterpark (1839) ^ ^- J- ^^- ^'4 76
.
...
'
<
...
;
72 L. J. K. B. 103 ; 88 L. T. 46 [1903] i K.B. 577 R. 343 ; 19 T. L. R. 189 Zouche's Case (1543) Dyer, 557 b Zouche (Lord) "" Dalbiac (1875) L. R. 10 Exch. 172 ; 44 L.J. Ex. 109 ; 33 L. T. 221 ; 23 W. R, 564 Zouche c. Forse (1806) 7 East, 186. Zouch V. Parsons (1765) 3 Burr. 1794 ; i W. Bl. 575 22, Zouch B. Thompson (1695) 3 L?y. 419.; Salk. 210 . . Zwinger . Samuda.(i8i7) 7 T^unt. 265 ; i Moore, 12 Holt, N. P. 395 ; i R. R. 476
Zimbler
51
o.
Abrahams
W.
573 762
551
...... ...
. .
.
Digitized
by Microsoft
ERRATA
TABLE OF CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS
PAR.
The
first
by Johnston
v.
Pedlar (1921)
XXXVII
T. L. R. 867. (note). For " Wills v. Read " read " Wells v. Head." 785 838 (note). For " Harmer " read " Hamer." S'jy (note). For " Seaton " read " Seton."
For " act or " read " act, or an." For " Hardon " read " Harden." 1039 1051 (note). For " 3 D. M. & G." r^ai " 8 D. M. & G." 1058 (line 12). For " I 33 " read " 1833." 1091 (vii.) (note). For " 1984 " read " 1894." 1099 (note). For " (1904) " read " [1904]." 1 109 (note). For " 1894, 8 (i) " read " 1894, s. 8 (i)." 1 1 82. Add footnote : " [Where the talcing effect of a contingent remainder is suspended by the statute, the land will, until the vesting of the remainder, pass as undisposed of by the settlement, if the limitations are legal (Re Scott [191 1] 2 Ch. 374). But where the limitations are equitable, the next vested remainderman will get the income of the land until the contingency happens {Re Conyngham [1921] I Ch. 491). Qutere : Are not all contingent remainders limited by testament now
912
(line 3).
(ii.)
(note).
8 3 (note).
1292 (note).
At end add " ]." For " Law of Property and Amendment Act " read " Law of
Property
1309 (note).
[1921]
Ch. 432." " " " 1334 (vii.) (note). For Llanwrwst r^ad Llanrwst." For " Ulestoater " read " Ullswater." 1335.
I
For "
sale
Add
to
note:
"When
of land, chattels
on the land
will be
Digitized
by Microsoft
ccxlii
of that one of
ERRATA
are
them who is owner of the chattels, even when they husband and Wife {Ramsay v. Margrett [1894] z Q. B. 18;
; ;
French v. Gething (1921) XXXVII T. L. R. 867)." " HuUock, B. " read " HuUock, B.) " 153s (note). For 1540 (i.) (note). For " [1903] " read " [1904]." 161 1 (line 3). For " or " read " of."
1719 (note).
1778
(line 14).
For " (1849) " read" (1850)." For " co-trustee " read " co-trustees."
After " 1822 " add "
).";
For " taken " read " taking." (note (b) ). For " i P. & D. " read " i P. D." 1977 2133 (footnote). For " ee " read " fee."
.,;uf
rm)
^.t."
2203
(ii.)
(note).
Digitized
by Microsoft
BOOK
SECTION
PERSONS
GENERAL
I
TITLE
1.
NATURAL
a
PERSONS
Legal
The
legal capacity of
his birth
purposes (63) a child en ventre sa mire as already born. Legal capacity is not
until the attainment of majority.
treated
complete
[The expression " legal capacity " is used in English Law to the notion of ability to acquire rights cover two different notions (which may be called " passive capacity "), and the notion of the ability to transact legal business ("active capacity"). The former may be said to date from the time of birth, the latter is only completely acquired on the attainment of full age.]
2.
Majority
is
attained at the
commencement of
Keb. 589.
Majority
Turball (1663)
3.
The
following persons
purposes of
less
Legal
in-
degree
'"^"^^
Digitized
by Microsoft
LAW OF PERSONS
viz.
of legal incapacity,
mar-
ried
women,
aliens.
(See Bk.
I.
Domicile
4.
person having
full legal
capacity
who
reit
sides in a
home, acquires a domicile in that country, and retains it until he acquires a domicile elsewhere. No person can have more than one domicile at the same tirne.
his
domicile," which is of great importance in sotnewhat unsettled in English Law. The statement in the text is generally accepted ; but the difficulty of interpretation is great, and the definition of "home'' is continually changing with changes of social habits. For a recent discussion of the subject, see Winans v. A.-G. in the House of Lords [1904] A. C. 287.]
civil matters,
is
Sc.
App. 448.
Domicile of
lunatic
.
5.
lunatic cannot
at
he had
the time
as
v.
when he began
be placed
under restraint
Urquhart
insane.
Butter field (1887) 37 Ch. D. 382.
Official domicile
6.
may be
stationed, retains
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERSONS
if that
7.
is
the same
is
as
Wife's
that of her
living apart
Dolphin
V.
she
in
fact
from him.
effect of judicial
8.
The
is
that of
Minor's
'""'"
minor
lives
that
of his mother, unless the mother has changed her The domicile domicile for a fraudulent purpose. of an illegitimate minor
living
;
is
if
she
is
domicile.
Butter Id fie
Potinger v.
v.
9.
If a
living,
Orphan's
his domicile
at
that
which
his
is
""'"
his
or her decease,*
It
doubtful whether a
120-4.)
Digitized
by Microsoft
4
Change of
minor's
domicile
LAW OF PERSONS
10.
minor cannot by
domicile.
v.
his
own act
i
effect a
change
of his
own
-i
Sharpe
Crispin
(1869) L. R.
P.
&
D. 618.
Domicile of
ortgin
1 1
person
acquired by his
who own
without acquiring a
new
at
which he had
App. 448.
Udny (1869) L. R.
Sc.
Presumption
'j
12.
A person who
is
'" '
years
presumed
in
is
no
any particular
And
the presumption
if
the circumstances
shew though
Trusts (1870) L. R,
Simultaneous
'"* '
13.
When
perished in
as to
.A,
two or more persons are shewn to have the same disaster^ there is no presumption
rule
is
venience, especially
to each other.
The
Wing
[1,901]
I
V.
P. 141.
Digitized
by Microsoft
may
asso-
any other business having gain for its object, except as an association under royal or statutory authority (ComBut an unincorporated association is, for panies Act, 1908, s. i).
legal purposes, very little
more than
number of
isolated individuals
employing
common
agents.]
Non-corpo'""
but
will recognise
"
"^
(a)
The
of unincor-
porated associations
sions
of the Criminal
s.
Law
i
;
68
1868,
s.
s.
12.
[b\
if regis-
tered or certified as provided by law, are entitled to enforce against their trustees
ficials
and
of-
Digitized
by Microsoft
6
1896,
Act,
s.
LAW OF PERSONS
15)
;
;
Religious
Literary,
&
1850)
Artistic,
Scientific
Institutions
Act,
(Trustee Appointment and Scientific Institutions (Literary & 1854) ; Trade Unions (Trade Union Acts,
Educational Societies
1871
&
1876).
(c)
An
liable, to
the extent of
nify persons
ful acts
its
associate property, to
who
have suffered
of the
officers
and servants
association,
of the association;
Toff Vale Ry. Co.
v.
426
(subject, of course,
now
Amalgamated Soc. of Railway Servants [1901] A. to the Trade Disputes Act, 1906, s. 4).
C.
{d)
A
of
Trade
Union
add
is
not
competent, either
originally to include
its
among, or by amendment
to, its
rules to
objects,
something
a
wholly
distinct
as
Trade
Union
Acts
;
Amalgamated
[See,
{e)
An
fact
formed with an
illegal
object,
may
in
be
de-
restrained
from expelling
member,
from
the
benefits
of membership, or ordered to
if so expelled.
i
'reinstate
him
is
Ch. 540.
[Such reinstatement
of,
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERSONS
16.
Corporations can only be created by the authority of the State, expressed or implied but, after
;
corporation!.
17.
corporation
its
may
at
consist,
^'"'P"''"''"'
aggregate
and
sole
whose members have become reduced does not thereby become a corporation sole.
[There
in
is, it
this
The
is believed, no express authority for the last statement but the results of a different ruling would be curious. "corporation sole " is, it is believed, peculiar to English Law.]
18.
Whether an
is is
individual,
who
is
also a corpora-
Corporation
tion sole,
"'
rate capacity,
of fact in each
Str.
case.
913.
19.
The
domicile of a corporation
is,
in the case
its
Domicile of
""'P'"''"""'
of
which
its
ad-
ministrative business
carried
on
in the case of
any
functions
17
Q. B. D. 421.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LAW OF PERSONS
20.
Foreign
corporation
A
-^^
Corporation
f^^.
which
is
j^^^
^j^^
Law,
foreign corporation.
Carron Iron Co.
v.
Maclaren (1855)
H. L.
C,
436.
a corporation domiciled in England may become " enemy," in fact, its agents are resident in enemy territory, or under the if, control of persons so resident {Daimler Co. v. Continental Tyre Co.
[And
[1916] 2 A. C. 307).]
Powers of
foreign
corporation
in the
same
same manner,
British
corporation.
Westman
v.
Ex. D. 237.
Scottish
and
22.
sued
A
in
Irish corporations
the
English
Coutts, even
though
it
has
Palmer
v.
Q.
B. 823.
[Apparently this rule now only applies where the proceedings involve service of process outside the English jurisdiction {Logan v. Bk. of Scotland [1904] 2 K. B. 495).]
Constitution
23.
The
is
of corporation
incorporation
by pre-
scription,
by immemorial custom.
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERSONS
to
9
Government
"J
affairs
of
"''P'"'"*'""
a corporation aggregate
vested in
all
the members,
assembled
ing
is
at a
general meeting.
can only
to
the
members
a reasonable
R. V. Harris (1831) i B. & Ad. 936. R. V. Langhorn (1836) 4 A. & E. 538; Re Bridport Old Brewery It is possible that, if all the corporators Co. (1867) L. R. 2 Ch. App. 191. attended, and waived the question of notice, the objection could not afterwards be raised. {R. v. Chetwynd (i8z8) 7 B. & C. 703-4.)
Majority
members assembled
all
at a
meeting are
present at
but a majority of
the
members must be
(1879)
B.
Co.
1
Bower (1823)
&
Powers of
corporatioti
27, 28, a corporation has, in the powers and liabilities of an individual, in so far juristic as they are capable of being applied to a
and
to
person.
But
of Parliament for a particular purpose, is limited, as to all its powers, by the purposes of its incorporation,
as
controversy, largely academic in character, has long existed as by English Law. to the true theory of the powers of corporations
[A
B 3
Digitized
by Microsoft
lo
LAW OF PERSONS
taken by the text, which is believed to be supported by is, that a corporation is presumed to be capable of doing and suffering anything which an individual can do or suffer, provided that the act or liability is not inconsistent with the very ^ nature of a corporation.]
the best authorities,
Eastern Counties Ry. Co. v. Hawkes (1855) 5 H. L. C. 348 ; Ashbury Railway ^c. Co. v. Riche (1875) L. R. 7 H. L. C. 693 ; A.-G. v. G. E. Ry. Co. (1880) L. R. 5 App. Ca. 473 L. C. C. v. A.-G. [1902] A. C.
;
The view
165.
V.
corporation can even sue for defamation (^South Hetton Coal Co.
N. E. News Ass.
[1894]
respect of
i
its
Q. B. 94).
was, until recently, the rule that a corporadon could not hold property But this disability has been removed. (Bodies Corporate (Joint Tenancy) Act, 1899.)
Mortmain
27.
An
Crown
or an
Act
Crown
roll
or
mesne
and
lord.
No
qorporation (even
as aforesaid)
by Act of Parliament
lord "
is
title,
life estate,
generally easy to
find.
But
if
which
will appear in
very likely be impossible to discover the mesne lord. The direct mesne lord has twelve months from the date of the assurance in mortmain in which to enforce his claim each superior lord has six months from the expiry of his immediate
III,
it
Book
will
inferior's right.]
Mortmain & Charitable Uses Act, 1888, s. i. A.-Q. v. Lewin (1837) C. P. Cooper, 54. Co. Litt. 46, b. ; Power v. Banks [1901] 2 Ch. 487.
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERSONS
28. Subject to the exceptions mentioned
below*
Acts of corP"""'^"^
and
in
Act, 1845, or the Companies Act, 1908) can only execute conveyances and enter into contracts through
the
medium of
its
its
common
is
seal,
cordance with
documents of incorporation.
But
of
its
every corporation
officials, servants,
acts
*[The exceptions from-the rule that a corporation aggregate can only execute conveyances and contracts through the medium of its common seal, are not very clear in principle. They appear to com(i) cases of immediate necessity or trifling importance prise (JVelh V. Kingstm-upon-Hull (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 402); (2)
:
purpose, is entering into an engagement in direct pursuance of that purpose (^South W. Colliery Co. v. Waddle (1868) L. R. 3 C. P. 463, and 4 C. P. 617) ; (3) cases in which a corporation, having received the benefit of an executed contract, entered into in pursuance of its ordinaiy business,
is
sued on
i
R. D. Council [iqo'il
K. B. 772.J
v.
Mayor of Kidderminster
Whitfield V. S. E. ^ji. C. ( 1 8 5 8 ) El. Bl. & El. 1 1 5 ; Cornford v. Carlton Bk. Ld. [1899] I Q. B. 392. This is the case, even when express malice Life Assurance Co, v. Brown [1904] is a condition of liability (^Citizens'
A. C. 423).
..
29.
A member
with
the
Contracts
contract
capacity.
individual
^^^^^^^
Hill'i. Manchester
5 B.
& Ad.
866.
Digitized
by Microsoft
12
Expulsion
LAW OF PERSONS
30. Subject to the documents of incorporation,
power
to
to
amove
But
its
person
whom
it
is
proposed
amove must be
own
V.
Richardson (1758)
;?. V.
By-lazoi
of .incorporation,
power
to
make
by-
which,
until
repealed,
will
ration,
by-laws, affect
who
are not
effect.
There are now very few such corporations which do nop derive their powers directly from statute.]
Chili V. Hudson's Bay Co. (1723) 2 P. Wms. 207. The existence of a by-law may be presumed after long usage. [R. v. Ashwdl (1810^. 12 East, 22.)
Burr. 1858.
Enacting
tody
and
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERSONS
33.
13
Dissolution
by Act of Parliament (any corporation), by the death of all its members or of all the members of an essential part of it
corporation
is
dissolved
by judgment of revocation on
mality
R.
34.
corporation which
is
sions of the
legal
for
'
capacity by the
commencement of proceedings
is
winding up.
for the
time being
Re
139.
35.
On
;
its
frank-
Assets on
'"'"'^*""
donors or
Crown.
Digitized
by Microsoft
14
LAW OF PERSONS
[The difference of opinion referred to in the Note below, is not of great practical importance. It is very unlikely that a corporation owning property would be dissolved before the property had been disposed of. In the case of modern corporations, such as trading companies, care is always taken to preserve the existence of the corIn the case of an poration until its affairs have been wound up. ancient corporation, the result of the practical difficulty of discovering the donor's heirs would be to give the property to the Crown. Presumably, the leasehold interests of such a corporation would
also, as personalty, pass to the
Crown.]
256, founded on Co.
the passage.)
Litt.
Blackstone,
see Hargrave's
Commentaries,
II,
13 b.
(But
&
Butler's
is
Note on
its
property jointly
rule,
dissolved,
joint
on the other
tenants
1899).
Re Higginson
y Dean [1899]
Q. B. 325.
(It is
term " personal property " will here include choses-in-action. And it does not include leaseholds. These expire on the dissolution of the corporation (Corporation of Hastings v. Letton [1908] I K. B. 378).)
corporation is dissolved, a new trustee is appointed, the trust property is vested by Order of the Court (Re No. 9 Re Ruddington Land [1909] I Ch. Bomore Road [1906] i Ch. 359
[If a trustee
in
whom
701)0
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
THINGS
36.
II
is
used in English
Law
acts,
Things
human
which
bodies,
omissions, and
forbearances.
is
The
sense
in
the word-
is
used
to
in each case.
37.
land
Things
'^"'
such
as
alienated inter
in land
vivos,
on the death of
offices, franchises,
dignities,
which
companies owning
"
real estate,"
Torre
estate"
v.
Browne (1855)
its
H. L. C. 571.
include
The
in
" real
{Re
and
equivalents
to
leaseholds
certain
cases
Drybutter
v.
Bartholomew (1723) z P.
Shares in a
W.
127; Buckeridge
y.
Ingram
by the Companies (Consolidation) Act, 1908, are personal estate, even though the company owns interests in land (Companies Clauses Act, 1845, s. 7 ; Companies Act, 1908, s. 22).
Digitized
by Microsoft
i6
Things
LAW OF PERSONS
38. " Things personal " include
all
"things" not
f'"""'^
"
Corporeai
heredita-
include
all
in-
ments
right to possession
whom
heirs
by
way of
sixccession,
or not.
[It must be remembered that a freehold estate which is subject only to a term of years is regarded as a corporeal hereditament. The possession of the termor does not destroy the seisin of the freeholder.]
interest
in land
may be
B.
the abolition of the necessity terms of years in possession haye also been classed as
P.
&
247).
Since
corporeal hereditaments
There
is
{Tomkins v. yones (1889) 22 Q. B. D. 599). some doubt whether the term "hereditament" does not more
properly apply to the subject matter of the interest, than to the interest itself (^boe v. Allen (1800) 8 T. R. 503). But it apjjears to be difficult
to reconcile this
a right of
Incorporeal
heredita-
all in-
ments
'
land
and peerages,
offices, fran-
treated as property.
Chose-inaction
41.
from another.
Digitized
by Microsoft
THINGS
by
legal
17
proceedings, any
money
to
or money's worth,
get
possession
of a
object, or not.
[The scope of the phrase " chose-in-action " is at present unsettled. Certainly the phrase includes claims to specific material objects, rights to enforce the performance of contracts, stocks, shares, and negotiable instruments ; probably also patents, copyrights, and trade marks ; probably not claims to compensation in damages for torts. (See discussions by various
writers of eminence, in
Law
42.
The term
itself,
includes,
in addition
to Land
the soil
unworked
the
soil,
buildings affixed
to
the
soil,
and
all
articles affixed to
the
soil,
manner
such events has usually to be determined by the rest of the docuBut in a testament it may the circumstances of the case. be governed by the Wills Act, 1837, s. 26, and, in an Act of Parliament passed after the year 1850, it is subject (unless the Act expressly provides otherwise) to s. 3 of the Interpretation Act,
in
ment or
1889.J
v. Eraser (1856) 25 L. J. Ch. 360, frequently followed. of the difficulty connected with the law of fixtures is the result of a careless use of terms. An article may be a "fixture," even though a lessee may be entitled to remove it at the expiration of his lease.
Mather
Much
Digitized
by Microsoft
i8
Servitudes
LAW OF PERSONS
43. Eascments, profits, franchises^ and other similar
rights exercised
by the owner or occupier of land, as included in the term " land," and pass
of,
on the conveyance
6.
It is
January,
1882.
(See A.-G.
v.
Ewelme
Movables
44.
The
a question
of fact
in
each
case.
No
upon
thfe
owner-
Tyre Co.
v.
Clipper
Pneumatic Tyre
Co.
''
[1902]
by condition or
[As to the possibility of restricting the user or transfer of movables contract, see Bk. III., Sect. IX., Tit. I., 1539.]
Profits
45.
value
The
which
"profits" of a thing
is
mean
the pecuniary
or
may be
tion, exercise, or
Dunn
E. 40
;
V.
Phillips V.
A.
&
Mesne
profits
46.
i.
e.,
Digitized
by Microsoft
THINGS
occupation,
19
may be
damage
all
(if
any) suf-
he may deduct
sums paid by
him which
Goodtitle V.
the lawful
compelled to pay.
Doe
I
V.
Tombs (1770) 3 Wils. 118 ; Phillips v. Homfray, ubi sup. Hare (1833) 2 C. & M, 146; Barker v. Brown (1856)
ii;o.
C. B. N.
S.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
III
LEGAL ACTS
TITLE
Convicts
LEGAL
CAPACITY
47.
viz.
{a)
The
and
alien
person
who
is
of treason or felony
Forfeiture Act, 1870,
ss.
6, 8.
(Outlawry
is
is
(1^)
-post,
74A.J
Property
48.
The
and
all
property
(including
choses-in-action)
of convict
which belongs
tion,
to
to a convict at the
property (including
which he becomes
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
by the Court, and
is
21
870.
the
[Under the old law, the personalty of a convict was forfeited to Crown, his realty (except in the case of a traitor, whose realty was also forfeited to the Crown) to the next lord of the fee. The Act of 1870 is not retrospective and the old law may possibly still
;
1870,
ss.
10, 12-18.
49.
tracts
made by a minor, and all conentered into by him for the repayment of money
testament
all
Minors
accounts stated
void.
Wills Act, 1837, s. 7. There are exceptions in the case of soldiers on and of sailors at sea (In the Goods of Mc. Murdo (1867) L. R. P. D. 540 ; In the Goods of Hiscock [1901] P. 78 ; Wills (Soldiers and
&
s.
I.
50.
Necessaries
goods and
tion
in
of
life,
and
actually required by
him
for his
Chappie
V.
&W.
[1891] 2 Q. B. 369
K. B. 520).
Digitized
by Microsoft
.22
LAW OF PERSONS
51.
Necessaries
Whether goods
is
classed as necessaries,
of law
whether
is
a ques-
of fact in each
Ryder
v.
case.
{\%(i%) L. R.
Wombwell
4 Ex. 32.
is
[The onus of proving the affirmative of the latter question the creditor {Nash v. Inman [1908] 2 K. B. i).]
on
Voidable
acts
52.
into
at
up
to a reasonable
is
after
he
What
each
time
is
a question
of
fact in
case.
are somewhat reluctant to compel a purchaser to which depends upon a customary feoffment by an infant (MaskeWs and Goldfinch's Contract [1895] 2 Ch. 525); but in the matter of " continuing " contracts the tendency is to give increased
[The Courts
title
take a
Continuing
contracts
53.
contract
(such as a contract
ship, or a contract
liabilities arise
from time
making
of the contract.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
54.
23
minor cannot,
in the absence
of fraud by
Money paid
^^ """'"'
money
it.
paid by
him under
if
he has
24 Q.
B.
D. 166
Holmes
Bing.
v.
Moo. 552;
Corpe
v.
Overton (1833) 10
sup.
252;
by
minor
for
such
Subrogation
him
in pay-
ment
a
by
lending the
money
whom
the
money
is
has actually
been paid
minor in payment
ently allowed to
[This doctrine, long ago adopted by Courts of Equity, but apparfall into oblivion, has recently been revived in the
case, cited in the note below.
It is
with
liabilities
properly incurred
benefited.]
I
in
The
liability
on the
parties
who have
Earle v.
I
Salk.
387;
Mar low
i
v.
Pitjield
(1719)
P.
558. Thurstan v. Nottingham Building Soc. [1902] Ex parte Margrett [1891] i Q. B. 413.
W.
Ch.
i.
56.
male
.
mmor
,
at
Marriage
settlements
female
mmor
at
Digitized
by Microsoft
24
LAW OF PERSONS
make
a
binding settlement of
instrument
appointment under
creating
it
power which
(in the
*)
is
power of
* These words
are not in
the
Act
but
it is
are
implied.
)
,
1855
'
^^ ^"^' ['^9']
^h. 298.
Ratification
^7.
No
ratification,
made, after
full age,
by any were
enforceable,
whether such
given for
new
consideration, or not.
Infants Relief Act, i874,"s. z.
Minor
agent
58.
as
minor may
act as
[The amount of
Stark.
(1818) 2
'
V.
Roberts (1847) 16 M. & W. 778). A minor married woman may, however, appoint an attorney by deed (Conveyancing Act, 1 881, s. 40).]
Small'j V. Smglly
(1700)
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
69.
25
a Miner
as
guardian, or a trustee
capacities until
'"""""^
he
In the Goods of Stewart (1875) L. R. 3 P. & D. 244. In some cases a minor can himself appoint a guardian, either or his children (12 Car. II. c. 24, s. 8 ; 2 Ves. Sr. 375). Re Shelmerdine (1864) 33 L J. Ch, 474.
for
himself
60.
if
A
is
he
minor can act as a witness on all occasions, old enough to understand the nature of the
R.
V. Brasier {ijTci)
1
Minor
^'(^"
transaction.
Leach C. L. 199.
61.
acts
minor
is
Torts of
'"'"'"'
making
8
a m,inor liable.
;
T. R. 335
Burnard
v.
Haggis (1863)
62.
respect of a
by
him during
Quare
:
his
minority.
Ex
were
parte
Jones (1881)
18 Ch. ,D.
109.
if
the
contract
for necessaries,
63.
be
Digitized
by Microsoft
26
LAW OF PERSONS
it
limited to
est
by deed
cannot be limited to
Taylor
v.
ifjii/a//
by deed.
Longv. Blackall
10
cover
{\']()'f)
&
all
II
cases
Will. III.
extended by interpretation
to
of posthumous children {Thellusson v. Woodford (^799) The rule does not apply when the result of following it
child of
an
Acts of
64.
The
;
unilateral acts
of a person of unsound
mind
done during
a lucid
interval
than marriage),
But
lunatic so
found, are
to the
is
void,
whether
his state
was known
at least if
person of unsound
mind
committed by him,
they do
Lunacy
65.
Whether
person
is
a question
of
[There
pacity.
is
will
no "status" of lunacy for the purposes of legal camay be valid, though it has been made by a person
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
seded [Roe
V.
27
Nix [1893]
Jenkins
v.
P. 55)].
66.
The
is
Necessaries
liable to
who were
s.
z.
67.
The
marriage of
person of unsound
mind
is
Marriage
at the
time
when
is,
by English Law. In other cases, the question is whether the alleged unsoundness of mind affected the particular transaction. In other words, a man may be sane on some points, and insane on others.]
recognised
Durham
ibid.
v.
Durham (1885) 10
v.
93
Cannon
Srnalley
Hunter
v.
Edney (1881)
68.
A contract
of partnership
may be
is
dissolved by
Partnership
'-f^"""^"^
found lunatic by
s.
35 (a).
Digitized
by Microsoft
28
Drunkards
LAW OF PERSONS
69.
The
drunken
64).
J.
Baxter (1873) 4^ L.
Ex. 73.
person
is
void per
se.'\
Bankrupts
70.
An
undischarged bankrupt
may
But
acquire pro-
being rights arising from purely personal services or injuries to his person or character, may be claimed
by
his
trustee
;
at real
creditors
dignities,
and
and
offices)
But
all
transactions
by
dealing with
him
by the
trustee,
are valid
against
the
Re Graydon [1896] i Q. B. 417. Prpbably, as against the trustee, the bankrupt will only be able to retain so much of the proceeds of his earnings as will suffice for the maintenance of himself and his family. Ex parte Vine (1878) 8 Ch. D. 364. New Land Development Asiaciation and Gray [1892] 2 Ch. 138.
Clayton's
Ch. 214.
Bankruptcy Act, 1914, ss. 47, 53. [It will be observed that the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act, though they affect the consequences of the distinction between real and personal property set up by Cohen v. Mitchell (1890) 15 Q. B. D. 262, and New Land Development Association and Gray {supra), do not abolish it entirely.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
71.
29
as regards
married
woman
is
now,
the ac-
Married
and disposal of property, and the acquisition of rights and liabilities in contract and in tort, in the
quisition
women
same position
as a single
woman,
s. i
;
1893,
s.
1907,
s. I.
except that
()
woman
cannot be rendered peror of
married
Such
liabilities
her property
Fairhurst v. Liverpool Adelphi (1854) 23 L. J. Exch. 163 ; Re Lynes The liability of a married' woman in respect of (1893) 2 Q. B. 113. pure tort seems to be somewhat doubtful. (See Married Women's Property Act, 1882, s. I (2), and jEar/^ V. Kings cote\\^<:>o\ 2 Ch. 594.) Of course her property
is liable.
{b)
is
mortuus
Married Women's Property Act, 1882, s. i (6). Matrimonial Causes Act, 1857, ss. 21, 256.
7 Bing. 762.
s.
125.
She may be restrained from anticipating her income, in manner stated in 105-108
;
[d)
as
Digitized
by Microsoft
30
LAW OF PERSONS
[But she can act as " protector of a settlement " ( 73) in respect which is her separate property (Married Women's Property Act, 1907, s. 3). SemUe, also when she is especially appointed " protector " by the settlor.]
of ,an interest
Aliens
rttis
and
s
72.
No
tfs
British subject
who
either a resident
within British
actually carrying
on business therein.
s.
I.
Aliens and
estates tail
73.
No
alien
settlement"
Sect.
I.,
of
England
{post,
Bk.
III.,
Tit. III.).
[A "protector of
required to enable the
a settlement"
is
a person
whose consent
is
by the same son may be either () the owner of the first life estate in the premises under the same settlement, or (V) a person specially appointed by
the settlor to act as " protector."
]
estate tail in remainder, created settlement, to bar the entail completely. Such a per-
owner of an
first life
Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833, s. 32. Quiere, as to the effect of the estate under the setdement being vested in an alien, and there being
,
no
special
appointment of protector,
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
74. Subject to the provisions of the
Acts,
31
Crown
Suits
Aliens
^""'^
and
( 171),
no
alien,
make
any
interest in land
by virtue of
a disposition
made
died
before 12th
May, 1870,
the death
or by virtue of a succession
occurring on
of any person
v^^ho
v.
(3)
Sharp
v. St.
Pace (1661) i Levinz, 59; Naturalization Act, 1870, Sauveur (1871) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 343.
74a.
An
;(")
alien
enemy cannot
sue in an English
Court
All contracts
purporting to be entered into with an alien enemy are void ;W and all contracts entered into by a British
subject with an alien
in so far as
enemy
before he
became such,
when he
to, or
became an
void,''')
except in so far
concomitant with,
proprietaiy
But the
them by proceedings before English tribunals, whilst he is an alien enemy ;(s) and rights which were acquired against an alien enemy before he became such, can be enforced against him by proenforce
tribunal.^'')
an alien
enemy means
a person (natural
Digitized
by Microsoft
3IA
LAW OF PERSONS
which the
British
Empire
at
war,W
as well
as
an
enemy
subject (natural or
juristic^'), residing or
British
Empire, except
equivalent,*),
on business
juristic person
is
an alien
enemy,
if its
controlled
by persons
who
in
fact
adhere
to,
take
enemies/")
Case (1702) 7 Mod,. Rep. 150 Brandon v. Nesbitt (1794) The Hooflljg^) I C. Rob. 196. (b) The Hoop, ubi sup. ; Von Helljield v. Rechnitzer (1914) Times Newspaper, nth December.
(a)
Sylvester's
;
6 T. R. 23
seems doubtful whether he can even obtain a writ of habeas Case [1916] I A, C. 421 ; Liebmann's Case [1916] i K. B. 268). But an alien enemy may be added as a nominal plaintiff by his partners who merely wish to use* his name to wind up the business (Rodriguez v.
[It
Speyer
(c)
[i 91 9]
A. C. 59).]
;
The Hoop, ubi sup. ; Willison v. Patteson (1817) 7 Taunt. 439 and Pipe Line Co. [1915] 2 Ch., at p. 1 36 (approved in Ertel Bieber y Co's Case, infra) ; Kreglinger & Co. v. Cohen (1915) XXXI T. L. R. 592.
P.obson V. Premier Oil
(d) Ertel Bieber 13 Co. v.' Rio Tinto Co.
[1918] A. C. 260.
[The " svtspension " Mtta in Janson v. Driefontein Minfs [1902] A. C. 484, probably refer only to rights which have matured before the outbreak of war. And it makes no difference that the contract itself provides for suspension during war {Ertel Bieber Co, v. Rio
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
31B
Tinto Co., uhi sup). But there may be one or two contracts which on the outbreak of war are merely suspended, e.g., life insurance
Ch., at p. 526.]
Jktiett-Gesellschafi [1918]
Halsey v. L'dwenfeld [1916] 2 K. B. 707 ; Hugh Stevenson Sons v. A. C. 239. (f) Tingley v. Milller [1917] 2 Ch. 144. In effect, the ancient rule that the private property of enemy subjects is res nullius has been abandoned by English law {Hugh Stevenson i3 Sons v. Aktien-Gesellschaft, uhi sup!). Qutere, as to property acquired by an alien enemy without contract, e.g., by will or
gift.
&
(g)
Robinson v. Continental Insurance Co. of Mannheim [1915] i K. B. In such a case, the alien enemy defendant can appeal {In re Mertens Patent [1915] i K. B. 857) ; but he cannot counter-claim, as that would, in effect, be to allow him to act as plaintiff (Robinson v. Continental Insurance Co., ubi sup). He may, however, plead a set-off {In re Stahkoerk, &c.. Patent [1917] 2 Gh. 272, 276). (i) Porter v. Freudenberg [1915] I K. B. 857 ; Scotland v. South African Territories (1917) 33 T. L. R. 255. (k) Porter v. Freudenberg, ubi sup. (1) Janson v. Driefontein Mines [1902] A. C. 484 ; Daimler Go. v. Continental Co. [1916] 2 A. C. 307. (m) Princess Thurn Taxis v. Moffitt [1915] i Ch. 58 ; Schaffenius v. Goldberg [1916] I K. B. 284. (n) Janson v. Driefontein Mines [1902] A. C, at p. 506 ; In re Mary, Co. v. Bubna (1915) XXXI T. L. R. Duchess of Sutherland; Bechoff, David
(h)
155.
394(o)
Daimler Co.
[The whole of the difficult subject of this will be found treated, with great learning and care, in a little work entitled Legal Effects of War, by A. D. McNair (Cambridge University Press, 1920).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Mode of
declaration
II
DECLARATION
OF INTENTION
may be
parties, intention
declared
Nature of
,
76. Subject to the various rules affecting the construction of written documents,
intention
means
a question
of
each
case.
Ostensible
intention
means of declaration which, in the circumstances, would reasonably be taken to indicate a particular intention, he cannot be allowed
77. If a person uses
to
as against
it.
any
party
who
has, in
good
faith, acted
;
upon
ibid.
Scope of
declaration
78.
It is
tention should be
made
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
upon
it;
33
it is (probably) necessary, that it should be made with the apparent object of being acted
but
upon by persons
79.
An
act or
Real '"""'""
by the parties to it to be of a different character, must be treated as of its real, and not as of its apparent character.
is small, except in conceived that the proposition There is, as a rule, no object in concealing the true is sound. nature of a transaction, except a desire to evade the law?. Presumably, however, the rights of innocent purchasers for value who rely on the ostensible transaction will be protected.]
[The amount of
but
it is
Benyon
v.
Nettlefield
(1850)
Mac.
&
G. 94;
Sprye
v.' Porter
i.
(1856) 7 E.
&
B. 78
[1892] A. C.
80.
meant
to pro- Mere
^""""""*'
it,
was aware of
real character.
Weeks V. Tibold (1605) & Ad. 232.
Rolle
Ab. 6
Guthing
v.
Lynn (1831)
2 B.
C 2
Digitized
by Microsoft
34
Fraud
LAW OF PERSONS
81. If a person has been induced by the fraud,
duress, threats, or
and declare
dead,
.
a particular
he be
as
his
representatives)
be
entitled,
who,
the time
when
knew, or ought
threats,
to have
known, of the
fraud, duress,
to
do so
faith
to the detriment
who
have, in good
and
upon
it
first
sentence of 87.
Loughnan [1893] i Ch. 736. Templer (1859) 4 De G. & J. 433. ij) V. Home (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 655 ; Barron v. Willis [1900] 2 Ch. 133. A person who takes by a voluntary gift from a purchaser for
Scholefieldv.
value
is
not a "volunteer."
H.L. C. 325
also
Foster v.
Mackinnon
(1869) L. R.
[He may
Sect. X.).]
Pt. III.,
Laches
82.
The
one of the grounds mentioned in 8i, must do so within a reasonable time after the discovery of the
fraud, or the cessation of the duress, threats, or
influence,
undue
and before
the
circumstances
have so
changed, by his
party cannot
own
be
remitted to his
is
former position.
of fact in
What
each
is
a reasonable time
a question
case.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
35
Mitchell V. Homfray (1881) 8 Q. B. D. 587; J/lcanl v. Skinner (1887) 36 Ch. D. 145. (It does not appear to be Rees V. de Bernardy [1896] 2 Ch. 446.
quite certain,
that the
Vrquhart v. Macpherson (1878) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 831. (But the mere fact of the deterioration of the subject-matter will not prevent the rescission of a sale (^Adam v. Newbigging (1888) L. R. 13 App. Ca. 308.)
83. If any person, having a right to avoid a transaction on one of the grounds mentioned in
81,
Confirmation
he cannot
afterw^ards avoid
it.
v.
Vanderplank (1855)
zK. &J. i;
Jarratt
Aldam
(i
870)
L. R. 9 Eq. 463.
84.
Undue
influence
,
w^ill
be presumed in trans1
\
Presumption
c benenciary,
of influence
parent and unemancipated child, guardian and former ward, legal adviser and client, medical adviser and
patient, spiritual adviser
and penitent, and between any other persons standing towards one another in a In such relationship implying special confidence.
cases,
must
the person seeking to affirm the transaction In other cases (except prove its fairness.
[The
rule has
(1876) 2 P.
Savery
v.
&
no application D. 462).]
to testaments.
{Parfitt v. Lawless
Coles \. Trecothick
Hyltott V.
(1804) 19 Ves. 234. King (1856) 5 H. L. C. 655. Hylton (1754) 2 Ves. Sr. 547; Hatch
v.
Hatch (1804)
9 Ves. 292.
Digitized
by Microsoft
36
LAW OF PERSONS
against the guardian
is,
of
Holman v. Loynes (1854) 4 De G. M. & G. 270; Broun v. Kennedy (1863) 33 L. J. N. S. Ch. 71 and 342 ; Liks v. Terry [1-895] 2 Q. B. A voluntary gift inter vivos made by a client to his legal adviser 679.
cannot be supported, even though undue influence be disproved {Rhodes v. But this latter rule does not Bate (1865) L. R. i Ch. App. 252).
apply to
gifts
by
vyill
{Raworth
v.
Marriott (1833)
Myl.
&
K. 643).
Huguenin s. Bazeley {y'&o'i) 14 Ves. 273; Middleton v. Sherburne (1841) 4 Yo. and C. 358. Billage v. Southee, ubi sup., at p. 540 ; Smith v. Kay (i 859) 7 H. L. C. 771.
Cases where
no presumption
85.
for-life
The
relationships of
[iSg^'\ 2 Ch.
578.
(The
was
4
i
Burr. 1979.
J.
Sevan
v.
Habgood (i%6q)
& H.
222.
Persons
86.
The
below normal
standard
upon
all
persons,
whether standing
deal with ex-
who
or
moral
distress,
and
with
knowledge of the person seeking to confirm the transaction, were at a disadvantEige in relation to it.
V.
Earl of Aylesford y. Morris (1873) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 484; Brenchley Higgins (1901) 70 L. J. Ch. 788. The Siles of Reversions Act, 1867,
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
Lane (1888) 40 Ch. D. 312. (1866) L. R. i H. L. C. 200; James (1889) 40 Ch. D. 449.
V.
37
Fry
fViJliams v. Bayley
v.
Kerr
bond fide mistake of fact, made without negligence, by one party to a transaction, as to the
87.
Mistake of
^"^
or
And
common
mistake
as to
rights of the
will
consent to execute
it
in such a
manner
as
to carry
L. R.
But
;
&
H. L. C. 673
Raffles v.
Calverley v. Williams (1865) L. R. I Ch. App. 58. Cooper V. Phibbs (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. C. 149 Winn (1873) L. R. 6 H. L. C. 223.
&
C. 906. Cochrane
v.
Willis
Earl Beauchamp
v.
bond fide mistake of fact by one of the r .1 J parties to a transaction, not being or the kind men88.
I
inoperative
mistake
tioned in 87, and not being induced by the fraud or misrepresentation of the other parties, will not
entitle the
But, if
it
Digitized
by Microsoft
38
to insist
LAW OF PERSONS
upon fulfilment of the
transaction, the
Court
(1858) 8 El.
&
BI.
815
Tompson
(1851)
this
Ha.
z68
Cecil (1861)
30 Beav. 62.
has been considerably shaken by recent Scriven Bros. v. Hind.ley\i<)i'i\ 3 K. B. 564 ; Bk. of Ireland v. McManamy [1916] 2 K. B. (Ir.) 161). And it would now seem to be almost safer for the mistaken party t-o repudiate the transaction entirely, than to plead hardship as a bar to specific performance i^ost, 289.]
[THe doctrine of
common law
decisions
{e.g.,
Innocent misrepresentation
89.
Where
a transaction
fraud or recklessness, of another party to the transaction or his agent, with regard to a material fact
(not being of the kind specified in 87), the party
so
set
has
become impossible to restore the parties to the positions which they occupied before entering into
the transaction.
('')
(a) Redgrave v. Hurd (1881) 20 Ch. D. i ; Newbigging v. Adam (1887) 34 Ch. D. 582. (b) Seddon v. N. E. Salt Co. [1905] i Ch. 326 ; Glasgow Railway v. Boyd [1915] A. C. 526.
in the
[The qualification in the latter part of the is frequently stated form of a provision that the transaction must- " remain in Heri" or "not have- been completed by conveyance." But the form in the text seems to be the more correct. Moreover, the qualifiication cannot be claimed as a protection by k party who
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
39
stands in a fiduciary relationship to the plaintiff {^Armstrong v. Jackson [1917] 2 K. B., at p. 825). No damages can, however, be recovered for innocent misrepresentation ; though the deferidant may be ordered to restore property formerly belonging to the plaintiff
{Derry v. Peck (1889) L. R.
14.
App.
Ca.' 337).]
90.
Mere
amount
r" 1
Non-disclosure
to misrepresentation, unless
it
or a sale to a
company by
or
its
promoters, or a contract
between agent
gift.
(or
fornier
may be
interest in land
{Fox
& J.
see
is bound to disclose any facts beyond those affecting his title Mackreth (1788) 2 Cox, 321 Walters v. Morgan (1861) 3 D. F. But there are dicta to the contrary. As to sales by promoters, 7 1 8). Central Ry. Co. of Venez.uela v. Kisch (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. C. 99 ;
-v.
;
Erlanger v. New Sombrero Phosphate Co. (1878) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 1218. As to insurance, see Bufe v. Turner (18 15) 6 Taunt. 338 (fire) ; London Assurance Co. v. Mansel (1879) 11 Ch. D. 363 (life); Marine Insurance Act, 1906, s. 18 (marine). As to partners, see Fawcett v. Whitehouse (1829) I R. & M. 132 ; Blisset v. Daniel (1853) 10 Ha. 493. As to agents, see McPherson v. Watt (1877) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 254. As to gifts, see Re Glubb [1900] i Ch. 354.]
91.
Money
;
belief, arising
Money
^^l^iJ^
from
it is
due, can be
recovered
unless
it
Brown (J856) 1 C. B. N. S. 121. Hampton (1797) 7 T. R. 269. Cadaval v. Collins (1836) 4 A. & E. 858 ; Ward
v.
Marriott
I
v.
v.
Wallis [1900]
Q. B. 675.
C 3
Digitized
by Microsoft
40
Maintenance
Law of persons
92.
No
its
conduct of
litigation, will
of the
he
is
[" Champerty " is the aggravated form of " Maintenance," in which the party agreeing to render the assistance stipulates for a share in the proceeds of the litigation {Rees v. de Bernardy [1896] 2 Ch. 437). Charitable motives will not justify champerty (Cole v. Booker (1913) XXIX T. L. R. 295).]
Shackellw. Rosier (1836) 2 Bing. N. C. 634. Guy V. Churchill (1888) 40 Ch. D. 481.
2 Inst.
564
Harris
v. Brisco
Bk.
II.,
Sale of evidence
93.
transaction
supplies, or
when
recovered,
[The point is, that a mere sale of evidence, not involving or contemplating any legal proceedings, or any assistance by the vendor But the Court must in the conduct of proceedings^ is per se lawful. be satisfied that the transaction is, actually as well as nominally, of
that character.]
Sprye V. Porter
(1856)
7 El.
&
Bl. 78.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
94.
41
Purchase iy
"'^'"''"'
The
which he
forceable.
fFooJ V.
7 El.
has,
is
unen-
&
Bl.
84
Dowines (1811) 18 Ves. izo; Simpson v. Lamb (1857) Davis v. Freethy (1890) 24 Q. B. D. 519. ;
95.
No
its
illegal
object
formance of an
deemed
forced by the
Court.
But
if the
parties
did not
will be enforced,
even though
it
unknown
to the parties,
were
Blantern (1767) 2 Wils. 341 ; Keir v. Leeman (1844) Willyams v. Bullmore (1863) 33 L. J. Ch. 461 ; Scott v. Brown [1892] 2 Q. B. 724. It is doubtful if the Court will take away property which has actually been transferred in pursuance of an immoral object which has been accomplished {Ayerst v. Jenkins (1873) L. R. But see Phillips v. Probyn [1899] i Ch. 811. 16 Eq. 275).
Collins
V.
6 Q. B. 308
Waugh
V.
(1873) L. R.
B.
96. For the purposes of 95, a transaction is re- immoral ^"^ garded as having an object immoral or contrary to
public policy, if
it
contemplates
connection,
ic)
[B)
the procurement of marriage in return for reward, (d) complete or undue restriction on marriage, [e)
Digitized
by Microsoft
42
LAW OF PERSONS
unreasonable restraint of trade, {f) deception of the public in matters of trade, () concealment of disgraceful
(/)
misconduct,
[h)
procurement
public
(o)
defeat or delay of
{m)
stifling
of prosecution for a
job-
Brown
v.
2
i
Q. B. 724. Ex. D. 5.
2
Hutnphreys
Polak [1901]
K. B.
385
Janson
v.
ontein Brief
124; Hartwell
v.
(1890) 45 Ch. D. 351 Ch. 173. Horwood V. Millar's Timber Co. [1917] I K. B. 305. Montefiore v. Menday Co. [1918] 2 K. B. 241.
I
Jones v. Merioneth
[A particularly interesting question is at present under conby the Courts, viz. whether an agreement by two or more persons not to bid against one another at an auction, and to share the profits of the "knock out," is "contrary to public policy." In Rawlings v. Ggneral Trading Co. [1920] 3 K. B. 30, Shearman, J., refused to enforce such a contract; but his decision has been overruled by the C. A. (1921) Law Times Jo., Vol. 151, at Would such an agreement give rise to an action of conp. 4). spiracy by the vendor {post, Bk. II., Pt. III., Sect. VI., 967), or justify him in refusing to complete the sale ? (anU, Tit. II., 81).]
sideration
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
97.
gal or
as
43
Reward of
'
A gift
or promise,
made
stands
immoral conduct,
'^""^
gift or
promise.
v.
Reeve (1846)
Tramac'lii'lar''^
plate an illegal or
Pigot's
Rep. 27;
Baai of
Australasia v. Breillat
(1847) 6 Moo.
C. zoi.
Restitution
at
any
immoral
illegal
claimant in minori
delicto,
Q.
Taylors. Botvers (1876) 1 Q. B. D, 300 ; fFilsoa v. Strugnell [liii) B. D. 548 ; Kearley v. Thomson (1890) 24 Q. B. D. 742. Atkinson v. Denby (i860) 6 H. & N. 778 ; Hermann v. Charlesworth
1
(1905)
18 L. T. 502.
100.
Any
absolute prohibition
of. alienation
at- Restraint
"" '"^"''^""'
324;
Dugdale
v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
44
Forfeiture
on bank-
LAW OF PERSONS
101.
ruptcy
bankruptcy,
is
also void.
Maci>tt.{iS32) zi Ch. D. 838.
Re
Termination
on alienation
102.
A
is
provision
for
the
termination
of a
life
ruptcy,
valid, if
it
against Perpetuities.
Baker
8 Eq.
V.
Nezvtott (^i&^g)
v.
2 Beav.
112;
3
262; Blackman
Fph [1892]
following refer only to beneficial fiduciary powers of alienation and management conferred upon limited owners by the Settled Land Acts and similar statutes. Any attempt to
restrict the exercise of these
Hayne (^iS6g) L. R. This and the two alienation, and do not apply to the
J^otaer v.
Ch. 209.
Land Act,
Limitation
until alienation
1882,
ss. 51,
powers is usually void. (See e. g. Settled S2,andpost, Bk. IIL, Sect. VL,Tit. IL, 1482),
103.
by a person of
an
interest in his
is
own
It is
own bank-
ruptcy)
valid.
now
be
Ex parte Stephens (1876) 3 Ch. D. 807. But a limitation by ,a man own property, to go over on alienation, cannot be defeated by a single creditor {Detmolds. DetmoU {iSSg) 40 Ch. D. 585).
of his
Brandon v. Robinson (liii") 18 Ves. 429; approved in Dugdale Dugdale (1888) 38 Ch. D. 180 ; Dean v. Dean [1891] 3 Ch. 155. Re Machtt (j%%z) 21 Ch. D. 842; Dugdale v. Dugdale, ubisup. Re Johnson Johnson [iip^l I K. B. 134.
v.
decision in
[The doubt above expressed must now be qualified by the Re Leach [1912] 2 Ch. 422, where, however, the point was
104.
valid, if
A
it
is
petuities.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
Re Macleay (1875) L. R. zo Eq. 188. been very severely criticised by Pearson,
26 Ch. D. 801.
restriction
J.,
45
The
result
may
of the two decisions appears to be, that the beyond the limits of a
particular class,
time.
A
it
conveyance of an
(probably)
purpose,
but not of prohibiting alienation altogether for a limited estate in land for charitable purposes may provide that, if the estate is not employed for the charitable shall revert to the donor or his heirs {Hollis' Hospital Case
105.
married
Restraint on
woman may
woman.
(The
v.
point
1
decision
on
this
Heriot [1896] A. C.
74-)
Armstrong (1838)
Beav.
gift
i.
It is
woman
when
the
takes effect
Revival on
"-'""''"''S'
but, if suitably
worded,
mean-
Eq.
40 L.
Digitized
by Microsoft
46
Setting aside
restraint
LAW OF PERSONS
107.
The
restraint
woman, be
is
set aside
by the
to
7;
Jie
Miller's
Settlement
[1891]
Liability
indemnity"
may
married woman, to
may
also
trustee
who,
in writing, has
of the estate
part.
.of
Married Women's Property Act, 1893, [1897] A. C. 177. Trustee Act, 1893, s. 45.
s.
2; Hood-Barrs
v.
Heriot
j.iability in
108a.
When
married
woman
has
been made
bankruptcy
which she
restrained
from anticipating,
amongst her
to
distribution
creditors.
s.
52.
[It will be remembered, of course, that a married woman carrying on business, whether separately from her husband or not, may now be made bankrupt {ihid., s. 125).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
109.
III
is
CONDITIONS
a
condition
Condition
forbearance,
20 1
a.
110.
right
is
which
Conditions
to arise,
^anlsulse-
on the occurrence of
is
?^'
to cease to exist,
called a
"con-
Hayward (1841)
Man.
&
G. 574.
111.
Whether
a term in a contract
is
a condition.
is
Conditions
""'^^'"'''''"'y
Brett (1865)
1 1
H.
L. C. 337.
112.
When
is
dependent
Fulfilment of
Digitized
by Microsoft
48
LAW OF PERSONS
com-
Fulfilment
113.
When
preven e
prevented by one of the parties to a contract or conveyance, that party cannot take advantage of
fulfilment.
1
its
non-
Mackay
v.
Invalid
conditions
114.
ditio'n
subsequent which
making it, or which afterwards becomes impossible by the " act of God," or which is illegal or immoral, is or becomes absolute, and an obligation defeasible
on the happening of
time of making
defeasible
it,
absolute
but an obligation
illegal or
immoral condition, or a condition which afterwards becomes impossible or illegal, is or becomes void.
I
on the happening of an
Browning
Re Croxon [I904]
and.
one
also
void
{^Laughter's case
(1595)
Rep. zib).
Time
115. Stipulations
conditions,
as to
as
s-
25 (7).
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
except where
{a)
:
49
The
shall
parties
Oaitien v. J'iie Hipwe/Iv. Knight (1835) i Yo. & C. (Eq. Ex.) 415 (Such a stipulation may, however, be waived (1865) 34 L. J. Ch. 620. by mere acquiescence.)
(/^)
There
is
a presumption,
Reuter v. Sale (1879) 4 '-' P- ^* ^39 (mercantile contracts) Withey (1823) Turn. & R. 78 (life annuity) ; Day v. Luke (1868) L. R. Eq. 336 Patrick v. Milner (iBjj) 2 C. P. D. 342.
'
Cottle
in the fulfilment
of a
though such
stipulation
is
[In order to entitle the party seeking to rescind the transaction to take this rule, he must have given to the party in default a notice
him
to
fiilfil
his obligation
has not
p.
347
been complied with (^Hatten v. Russell (1888) Compton v. Bagley [1892] i Ch. 313)-],
38 Ch. D.
at
116.
Mortgages
redemption of
mortgage;
it.
but
it
may,
if not
un-
reasonable, delay
[This
is
rules adopted by the Court of Chancery " Once a mortgage, always fundamental maxim " It could be wished that the limits of" reasonableness a mortgage." in this connection were a little more clearly defined.]
in
support of
i.
v.
Taliot
V.
Braddill (1683)
Vern.
Mansfield
at
(1841) p. 729
I
;
Dr.
Biggs
& W.
V.
at p.
598; Teevan
Digitized
by Microsoft
5
Penalty
LAW OF PERSONS
117.
penalty imposed
;
but a
intended merely
loss
occasioned
valid.
Whether
is
a liability a question
is
in the nature
of a penalty, or not,
case.
of fact in each
Re Bagenham Dock
Irving
I
(1858)
El.
Bl.
1022
Mercer
v.
&
Williams
[1899]
Q. B. 382.
Forfeiture
118.
for
The enforcement
of a condition of re-entry
is
of leases
Book
III.]
s.
ss.
2-5.
j^onds
119.
On
an ordinary
money bond,
the creditor
4 Anne (1705)
c.
16,
ss.
13, 14.
Intervening
""^^^
120.
When
an interest in land
is
forfeited
all
by the
the acts of
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
forfeiture,
51
[This again is one of those elementary rules of law for which it hard to find an express authority. But, if it did not exist, every condition subsequent could be evaded in the simplest manner.]
is
Pericins,
Profitable Book,
s.
840
Shepjiard,
Touchstone,
121.
"conditions in law," posed by law, independently of the agreement of the conditions are now very rare.)
rule does not always apply to
i.e. conditions
parties.
!l!
Digitized
by Microsoft
121.
An "agent"
is
a person
who
has authority,
and
defaults.
Capacity
122.
Any
may
act as an agent
but his
own
cipal
rights
and
liabilities,
and third
parties,
be determined by his
legal capacity.
Smally
v.
Smally (1700)
6.
Effects
of
123.
The
I)
and agent,
Part III).
re attons tp
governed by the
Law
of Contract (Book
II,
Part
or Quasi-contract
(Book
The
by the
facts
of each case,
lationship of principal
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
124.
53
The
may
Agency by
ment of both
tionship
may be
inferred
There must be consent of both parties. A person cannot be compelled Halky (i868) L. R. 2 P. C. at p. 201).
except that
{a)
deed
is
An
(unless the
executed by
him
in
the
himself ap-
pointed by deed
Berkeley v. Hardy (1826) 5 B. B. & Ad. 647.
&
C.
355
R.
v.
Longnor (1833)
{!))
An
is
made
objectsibr
created)
common
seal
of the
Arnold v. Mayor of Poole (1842) 4 Man. & G. 860; Henderson v. But, as between the corporaA. R. Mail Co. (1855) 5 El. Bl. 409. tion and third parties, an agent may be appointed by mere conduct {Faviellv. The Eastern Counties Ry. Co. (1848) 2 Exch, 344).
125.
after the
The
principal
agent has
Agency by
cation").
But a person
who
on
his
own
Digitized
by Microsoft
54
LAW OF PERSONS
;
acted as an agent
ceeds to act
as
agent.
that the agent be accepted, proThe intended principal may decline or but, if he accepts it, his acceptance relates
is
:
assuming
his offer
to
&
G. 242; Keighly 6-
Co.
v.
Liability of
126.
The
principal
governed by the
Authority
knozvti
127.
When
make
(1876) 34 L. T. 942.
Authority
unknown
known
bility
of the principal
is
agent
"general" or
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
129.
55
General and
'P"'"^ "S'""
"general agent"
{a) in a
is
an agent appointed to
act as such:
com-
of his principal
A "special
act,
agent"
is
an
not being in
130.
person
who employs
a general
agent
is
Liability
for
f!.*^,^
employment,
done or
and for
all his
wrongful
acts or defaults
acts
ratified
by him.
Smith V. McGuire (1858) 3 H. & N. 554; Edmunds v. Bushell Watteauy. Fenwick [1893] I Q. B. 346; [1865] L. R. I Q. B. 97 Shaw V. Port Phillip Co. (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 103; Edwards v. Midland Hy. Co. (1880) 6 Q. B. D. 287 ; Eastern Counties Ry. Co. v. Brown (1850 20 L. J. Exch., at p. loi.
;
131.
partner, a
manager of
a business, a factor
Partners
of 130.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
5.
Barwick
\.
Bank (1867) L. R.
Ex. 259.
Digitized
by Microsoft
56
Drinkwater
w.
LAW OF PERSONS
Goodwin {ijj^)
i
East India Co. v. Hensley {ij<)^) i Esp. (1864) 17 C. B. N. S. 298. Jr/i-ar v. Barton (1840) 6 M. & W. 138.
v.
Knight
^5^^
132.
is
(probably)
maintained; unless her husband 'has either () supplied her with sufficient necessaries, or money to
purchase the same, or
pledge his credit.
Phillipson v. Hayter (1870) L. R. 6 C, P. at p. 41 Westmoreland [1903] I K. B. 64. Debenham v. Mellon (1880) L. R. 6 App. Ca. 24. Jolly V. Rees (1864) 5 C. B. N. S. 628.
;
(^) expressly
forbidden her to
Morel
v.
Earl of
Wife
"^""^
living
133.
A wife
living apart
either
is
with
his consent, or
by reason of
his misconduct,
her
unless she
is
who justifiably, but against her husband's perhaps, the one case in which, by English
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
Law, agency does
It
57
not
now
rest
would be a
violent straining of
on agreement, express or implied. argument to urge that authority such circumstances was implicitly
Negus V. Forster (1882) 46 L. T. 675; Eastland v. Burchell (1878) Q. B. D. 432. Wilson V. Glossop (1888) 20 Q. B. D. 354; Harris v. Morris (1801)
4 Esp. 41.
Atkyns v. Pearce (1857) 2 C. B. N. S. 763. Apparently adultery during cohabitation does not alter the wife's legal position (^Robinson v. Greinold (1704) i Salk. 119).
134.
a Housekeeper
135.
child, even
though
living
child
M. & W. 482;
Shelton v. Springett
136.
husband
acts
is
Torts of
the
tortious
being directly
^'^'if"
Digitized
by Microsoft
58
LAW OF PERSONS
committed
at his instigation,
Liverpool Adelphi Loan Co. v. Fairhurst (1854) 9 Exch. 422 ; Earle Kingscote [1900] z Ch. 585. Moon V. Towers (i860) 8 C. B. N. S. 611. (If the parent actually
as his
agent, he
is,
[Sentence of judicial separation before judginent is obtained in the action of tort, releases the husband from liability (Cuenod v. Leslie [1909] i K. B. 880).]
Ante-nuptial
137.
tracts
husband
torts
is
con-
and
prop-
erty
coming
to
him from
or through her.
Married
for his
Act, 1882, s. 14. Previously to the Property Acts, the liability of the husband
wife's ante-nuptial
contracts
and
torts
disap-
p.
321).
Torts of
servant
138.
master
is
and defaults of
ter
his servant,
employment
in the
same
of
is,
probably, a survival
gild contracts
statute labour.
The
;
Acts men-
much of
its
force
many
callings to
v.
which
their provisions
do not
apiply.]
Bayley
V.
Manchester &'C.
i
Ry
H.
Co. (1873) L. R. 8 C. P.
148
Degg
& N.
773.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
139.
59
contractor
Where
which is Kkely, unless carefully performed, to result in damage to a third party, and there is a duty cast upon such person to use reasonable
tractor to
do an
care and
skill,
140.
person
who employs
a special agent
is
only
special agent
T. R. 757
Bradyv. 7W</(i86i) 9 C.
B.
N.
S.
592.
141.
The
relation of principal
as Revocation
''
"^^"'^
it
except that:
{a\
The
Digitized
by Microsoft
6o
LAW OF PERSONS
with
whom
who
have no
&
Re
Oriental
Bank
Corp.
(J))
a person acting in
good
faith,
on
power of
attorney,
is
23.
power of
Dec.
to be irrevocable for
date,
is,
in favour
of a purchaser, irrevocable, or
(as
irrevocable
the case
may
be) by
Agenfs
;
lia-
142.
An
is
not personally
'
tty on
contract
or for
[1893]
e.
B. 3S0,
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
except that
()
:
6i
who
executes a deed in his
a person
is
own name
therein, even
it
though he
is
expressed to execute
as
agent
Appktony. Binhs {\%o\)
J East,
418.
[b)
a person
who accepts a bill of exchange drawn upon' him in his own name, is personally liable,
as
agent
[c)
trade, a person
who
liable
unnamed
principal
may
8
be made personally
C. P. 482
Pike
v.
Ongley
[d)
person
who
professes
to act as
to
an agent,
so, is per-
do
who
deal with
him on
("
warranty of authority
Crown
Collen V. Wright (iSS7) 8 El. Bl. 647 ; Firbank's Exors. v. Humphreys (1886) 18 Q. B. D. 54 ; Tonge v. Toynbee [1910] I K. B. 215. (If the aUeged agent knew that he had no authority, he may be liable in an action ex delicto.)
&
Dunn
S.
V.
Macdonald [1897]
0/
State (1920)
XXXVII
(See also
Denning
v.
(e)
who
does
third
Digitized
by Microsoft
62
party,
LAW OF PERSONS
is
presumed
to be himself personally
liable' for
Huttoti V. Bulloch
of liability
may
be rebutted.
(1874) L. R. 9 Q. B. 572. But the presumption (Gaddy. Houghton (1876) i Ex. D. 357.)
[The del credere agent does not guarantee performance of the payment due from his principal (Gabriel v. Churchill [1914] 3 K. B. 1272).]
Agent's
lia-
143.
^j.
An
agent
is
hhiy
tn tort
^^^^^
were au-
And
makes no
[1892]
Q. B. 495.
'Undisclosed
ijrtnctpa
144.
When
is
person,
who
apparently acts as a
principal,
may be made
&
Gr
at p.
liable
by
whom
Calder
v.
Dobell
except that
(a\
{b\
A person
deed in which he
Re
see
not
named
as a party;
525.
(But
Young
Ch. App.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
[c)
63
a foreign principal
contract
is
572; Armstrong
v.
Stokes
[d)
person cannot be
instrument, unless
a trade
name,
is
which he
was
member,
it
in the partner-
ship
name
Ducarrey v. Gill (1830) Moo. & Mai. 450; Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, ss. 23, 89. As to when the acceptance of a bill of exchange by an active partner will bind a dormant partner, see Yorkshire Banking Co. v. Beatson (1880) 5 C. P. D. 109.
[e)
if
latter
cannot, to
of the
principal,
hold
him
/V
liable
Heald v. Kenworthy (1855) 10 Exch. 739; Armstrong v. Stokes (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 598. But the exception does not apply where the agent, though not naming his principal, admits that he is acting as an agent ^'^^ indeed there is some doubt (Irvine v. Watson (1879) 5 Q- ^' '-* '^) whether it applies at all, unless the creditor has in some way induced the principal to believe that he may safely settle with the agent.
5
[f) a third party who, after discovering the existence of the principal, unequivocally manifests
his intention
Mitchell {i^^q)
El.
&
El.
623.
Digitized
by Microsoft
64
!,
LAW OF
[g)
if
PE'RSONS
recovers
third
party
judgment against
li 8y-vini,
ja3;^j5
3 the principal,
mains
unsatisfied.
H.
&
C. 977;
Kendall
v.
Hamilton
Men's rea
145.
When,
in
it
is
mind,
agent.
it w^ill
to
ifi'j
Mayhew
IK'
v.
Fames (1825)
v.
B.
&
C. 601
B.
44 L. T. 694.
.Blackburn
Haslam (1888) zi Q.
D. 144.
Action by
146.
jr
1'
An
undisclosed principal
may
declare
himwould
But
uniscose prmctpal
his be-
half, unless
who
Browning
v.
P. C. 263.
'\''Eumble-w. Hunter (1848) i 2 Q. B. 310. Qucere, whether this qualification extends to verbal statements (Lucas v. De La Cour (18 13) 1 M.
&
S. 249).
Where
is
principal, but
in fact acting
on
his
own
behalf, he
may
sue
Digitized
by Microsoft
LEGAL ACTS
tract,
65
jivery
ev?n though
it
is
in
writing {Schmalz
v.
(1951) zo
L.
J.
Q. B. 228).
Barries
V. Eshelby
v. Imperial Ottoman Bank (iSyj) L. R. 9 C. P. 38; Cooke (1887) L. R. 12 App. Ca. 271 ; Montagu v. Ftfrjt'W [i 893]
r;
>'.
Q.
B. 350.
'11
b-.
'.
,'1
.,
;.
/hfii.i^nij'.
".!
\y>i
147.
An
as such,
canthe
Action by
"i"^'
name of
not,
Fair lie
f
v.
unless
[a)
he has
a special property in the subject-matter
Millington (1788)
H.
Bl. 81.
{b')
the Other party, with knowledge of the facts, has consented to treat
Rayner
v.
him
as a principal
359.
Grote (1846) 15
M. & W.
ic)
he
is
by him
principal
Sunderland Co.
v.
Kearney (1851) 16 Q.
B., at p.
939.
[d)
made by
&
deed, to
which the
Ad.
at p.
102.
D2
Digitized
by Microsoft
66
(^)
LAW OF PERSONS
he has entered into the contract on behalf of
a foreign principal.
There
is
extraordinarily
little
but
it
it
is
clearly implied in
Willis v.
is
upon
in practice.
so, all
'
defences which
.'
'
would
'.
'
&
C. 227
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION IV
TIME
148. A legal day and begins and ends
Co.
Litt.
consists
at
midnight.
1353; Migotti V. Colville (1879) 4 C. P. D. 233. Time, document, means Greenwich mean time (Statutes (Definition of Time) Act, 1880).
in a legal
of a
but, if
two or more
"''
occur on the same day, the order in which they occur may be proved, except as against claims by the Crown.
Mary's, Warwick (1853) > El. & Bl. 816; Smith I K. B. 285. Tabernacle Building Society v. Knight [1892] A. C. 298. H. V. Edwards (1853) 9 Exch, 52, 628.
R.
Coast
V.
St.
v.
Gold
50.
A judicial
act
is
deemed
to have been
it
done
judicial
acts
at
actually
took place.
Wright
writ of
B.
V.
summons
The
v.
D. 63).
Digitized
by Microsoft
68
Acts of ar tamen
LAW OF PERSONS
151.
An Act
at
^^
it
which
be)
the case
to
;
may
on which
1889,
s.
fixed
by Parliament
commence.
Interpretation
Act,
when
in
time
is
fixed, either
act,
by law or by agree-
of
less
R.
S.
& N.
331.
Holidays
^^S.
fiar
When
doing any act expires on a Sunday, or other holiday, such act may be duly done on the next business
day
;
that,
falls
when
due on
a bill
a
dishonour
is
business day.
Morris v. Barrett (1859) 7 C. B. N. S. 139; Hughes v. Griffiths (1862) 13 C. B. N, S. 324; R. S. C. 1875, O- LXiy. r. 3. . E. g. a bill of exchange which falls due ori a Sunday is payable on the previous day (Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, s. 14 (i) (a)). Bank Holidays Act, 1871, ss. i, 2.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TIME
154.
artificer,
69
Sunday
'^''
Any -contract
workman,
'"^
void.
But
of necessity
and
a
is
bill
of exchange,
invalid,
promissory note,
or
cheque,
not
only
by reason that
Sunday
B.
it
&
Q.
Observance C. 406.
B. 725.
1677,
s.
Fennell
v.
Ridler (1826) 5
v.
Scarfe v.
I
Snow [1900]
Ji. V.
Bills
is
to
be Month
month
" means
month of twenty-eight
days,
Chawton (1841) i Q. B. 247. Lacon v. Hooper (1795) 6 T. R. 224; Rogers v. Dock Co. (1865) Bruner v. 34 L. J. Ch. 165 ; Hutton v. Brotvn (1881) 45 L. T. 343 Moore [1904] I Ch. 305.
;
but:
[a\
which
it
means,
month;
Interpretation Act, 1889,
s.
R.
S.
C. 1875, O.
LXIV.
r.
i.
{b\
In
bills
contracts
the
sale
of goods,
it
means
10 (2).
month;
Goods Act, 1893,
s.
s.
Sale of
Digitized
by Microsoft
70
(c)
LAW OF PERSONS
A
" twelve-month " fneans a period of twelve calendar months and a " half-year " {tempus
;
semestre)
f
.
c.
[d\
"
six
months "
a tenancy
usual
quarter days,
Davies (1878)
C. P. D. z6o."
Reckoning
tn
is
man
reckoned from the day on which the period commences, to the corresponding day in the following
month, and
in the last
so on.
If there
last
is
no corresponding day
month, the
day of that
month
is
reckoned
'
as
Freeman
Read (1863) 4
Colville
B.
&
S.
174.
ottiy.
(1879) 4 C.
P.
D.
at p.
238.
Calendar
^^"^^
156a.
A commoD
hundred and
sixty-five days.
bissextile
or leap
2000 a.d.
common
Digitized
by Microsoft
TIME
157. Generally speaking,
71
a
when
time
is
fixed for
inclusive
""^^ "j
period
commences
is
day.
act,
of an
is
But when a period is allowed for the doing the day on which the period commences
not included.
Russell \. Ledsam
(1845) 14 M.
& W.
at
p.
582; Migotti
v.
Col-
ville,
uhi sup.
V.
Migotti
>
Lester v.
[1892]
Bartholomew
D3
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION V
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
Limitation
158.
The
of actions
civil claim, is
which begins
at
which the
passim,')
Periods
159. Subject to
respective periods,
money due
upon a deed or recognizance, or to proceed on a recognizance by scire facias, or to enforce a specialty contract, or to recover the
s.
period of
twenty years
Civil Procedure Act, 1833,
s.
3.
Law
of Property
Amendment
1884,
Act, i860,
s.
13.
3.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
(^)
73
a period
of,
twelve
Barnes
v.
Glentan [1899]
Q.
B.
885.)
(c)
imprisonment
a period
of four years
Limitation Act, 1623,
s.
3 (3).
{d)
copyright
10.
{e\
se
("slander") or for
years
Limitation Act, 1623, s. 3 (4). Civil Procedure Act, 1833, s. 3.
against [f) In the case of a claim by auditors a period Poor Law Guardians and officers
of nine months
Poor
Law Amendment
Act, 1849,
ss.
9, 11.
Digitized
by Microsoft
74
(_g-)
LAW OF PERSONS
In the case of a claim for any act done in pursuance
of,
a period of six
months
1750, s. 8 ; Public Authorities Protection Presumably, this latter Act repeals s. 170 of the Army Act, 1881, which allows twelve months for proceeding under that Act. (See Andrews v. Clifford (1920) Times Newspaper, 20th December). As to what constitutes an act or neglect connected with a public duty, see Sharpington v. Fulham Guardians [1904] 2 Ch. 449.
Protection Act,
I
Act,
1893,
s.
(a).
[In actions under the Act of 1893 for continuous damage, the period does not commence to run until the ceasing of the damage; and damage sufffered more than six months before the action may be vindicated {Hague v. DoncasUr R. D. C. (1908) T. L. R. 130; Bradford Corpn. v. Myers [1916] 1 A. C. 242).]
XXV
(h)
Crown
Ap-
a period
of three
Heir Apparent's Establishment Act, 1795, s. 9. The particulars must be delivered within ten days after the expiration of the quarter in which the demand accrued (s. 7), and the action must be brought against the officer, and not against the Heir Apparent (s. 9).
(?)
s.
a period of
Law Amendment
Limitation Act, 1623, s. 3 (2) ; 4 Anne (1705) c. 16, Act, 1856, s. 9 ; Trustee Act, 1888, s.
17
Mercantile
8.
[Owing to the curious history of the English law affecting chattels, there appears to be no statutory time-har to the recovery of chattels in specie {Mitchell v. Moseley [1914] i Ch. 438).]
Acknowledgment
160.
claimant's
x\^&, or a
him
Digitized
by Microsoft
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
75
whom
he claims, on account of principal, rent, or interest, by the person in possession of the land, or liable to the debt or damages for breach of contract,
will cause the period of limitation to
recommence
action on ac-
except that,
legacy, has
when
claim
to
land, or rent, or a
become unenforceable by
will revive
it.
ment
or
payment
edgment,
on simple contract,
pay
may
be reason-
Amendment
Act, i8z8,
s.
Law Amendment
s.
1874,
s.
8.
1833,
at p.
34^ 1874,
;
s.
8;
Kibble
v.
(187 1) L.
563-
v.
XX
161.
An acknowledgment
or
payment by one of
Co-debtors
ning in
favour of the
it is
unless
the
act,
person
as
making
agent.
life
entitled to act,
and does
interest
their
by
a tenant for
testator,
dermen
of the
Digitized
by Microsoft
l-je
'TO
^>5^('l
LAW OF PERSONS
Act, 1828,
s.
Statute of Frauds
s.
Amendment
Mercantile
Law Amend-
14; Real Property Limitation Act, ,1874, s. 7; Dickenson \.' Teesdale (1862) i De G. J. & S. 52; Richardson v. Tounge (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App, 478. Wood V. BraddhJi (1808) i Taunt. 104; Re Frisby (1889) 43 Ch. ''^" J't D. 106. i? (?(/'; V. Mr/fj (1857) De G. & J. i ; Re HoUingshead (1888) 37 Ch. D. 651! 'I Re Macdonald [1897] 2 Ch. 181.
menit Act, 1856,
'
~gb3lv/('fl>l^l;
-IWofi>l:>i;
Joint claimants
'
7f[3Up,. :
>^
Ji
162.
An acknowledgment
:
Of
payment
to
one of
joint
claimants
prevents
the
period
of limitation
^otoi^ y.'^'Lord
Waterpark (1839)
L.
J.
Limitation Act, 1874, s. 7."'(But th6 claimants must really be joint, and not several. Ashlin v. Lee (1875) 44 L. J. Ch. 376.) 7\
Concealed y'
fraud"
ant, or
whom
he claims, or
for
whose
ni>\^Vv, -
he
is
responsible, a cause
upoa which
he claims, he
not discovered
whom
time
when
it
of limitation
might
have disdovered,
thfe
Real Property Limitation Act, 1833, s. 26 ; Bulli Coal Co. v. Osborne (Probably a [1899] A. C. 351; Re McCallum [1901] i Ch. 143. similar rule applies where, owing to a mutual mistake, a claimant has remained in ignorance of his rights. Harris v. Harris (1861) 29 Beav. no. But the rule in the is confined to claims which could, prior to the Judicature Acts, be made the basis of a suit in equity {Armstrong v. Milburn (1886) 54 L. T. 247, 723 ; Osgood V. Sunderland (1914) ill L. T. 529).
Digitized
by Microsoft
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
164.
77
Trustees
Statutes of Limitation, if
property which
is
pro-
same
to his
own
use.
s.
How
v.
165.
Except
in
respect of claims to
interest,
advowsons,
to
Disabilities
and
redeem
mortgagee
of limitation dpes
an infant,
who was
when
commenced
to
or,
run
is
insanity.
De
Beauvoir
v.
Owen (1850)
Exch.,
at p.
182.
1623, s. 7; Civil Procedure Act, 1833,5. 4; Real B\it, in the case of actions to Property Lirnitation Act, 1874, ss. 3, 5. recover land or rent, the period after the removal of the disability is six years only ; and the extreme limit is thirty years from the accrual of the The disability of marriage is now, virtually, abolished. cause of action.
Limitation Act,
{Lowe V. Fox (1885) 15 Q. B. D. 667; Trustee Act, 1888, s. 8(b).) GoodaU V. Skerratt (1855) 3 Drew. 216 Murray v. IFafl^ins (1890) 62
;
L. T. 796.
Kinsman
v.
166.
The
Future
""^''^^'^
determination
interest.
of the imBtjt
if the
Digitized
by Microsoft
78
LAW OF PERSONS
a preceding interest
is
owner of
but of possession at
from the time when the owner of the preceding interest ceased to be in possession, whichever is the
longer period.
Real Property Limitation Act,
1
874,
s.
2,
Estates tail
67.
When
against a tenant-in-tail,
all
it
persons
whose
interests
he
is entitled to
bar; and
of
which does not bar the remainder, from the time at which such tenant-in-tail could have barred
tail,
the remainder.
Real Property Limitatidn Act; 1833,
ss.
zi.zz, 23;
1874,
s-
6.
Short
tenancies
168.
When
a person
is
in possession of land
as
first
year of
the tenancy
land
as
and when
person
is
in possession
of
a tenant-from-year-to-year, or
without any
Digitized
by Microsoft
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
year or other period of tenancy, or from the
receipt of rent, whichever last happens.
Real Property Limitation Act, 1833,
Ibid.
s.
79
last
s.
7.
8.
169.
No
land or rent
may be
recovered by an
Corporations
ecclesiastical or
"^^
the time at
which the
is
from
that
whichever
Real Property Limitation Act, 1833, s. 29. (The six years are reckoned from the appointment of the third incumbent, not from the happening of the vacancy.)
170.
("
claim
"),
to
the
patronage
of
church
Advowsom
Advowson
whichto
the longest
and no claim
after
such
through
whom
he
Digitized
by Microsoft
8o
Crown
suits
LAW OF PERSONS
171. Claims by and
against
the
Crown, other
than claims in respect of the personal estate of a deceased person, are not affected by the ordinary Statutes
of Limitation.
to real
from
receipt
of rent
in respect thereof.
Intestates Estates Act,
1884,3.
s.
I
3,
i
>
Rustomjee
v.
Q. B. D; 491.
s.
Crown
Suits Acts,
1861,
I.
Extinction
172.
When
of title
title
extinguished
money charged on
land,
or to claims by the
Crown.
s.
34.
Re Lane Re Lord
quence of
The consecan (probably) be enforced by any lawful means, other than the bringing of an action e. g. ; by retainer, set-ofF, seizure, &c.
Goodtitle d.
tliis
Parker
v.
exception
is,
Arrears of
tithe rent-
173.
years' arrears
of tithe-
charge
not by action.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
174.
8i
Other
of rent, or
secured
is
by express
ss.
trust.
1623,
s.
Limitation Act,
.3;
1833,
^-
175.
dr
The
legal or
landlord
of
r
an
1
agricultural
holding
Agricultural
holdinf
from the
who
distrains
upon
bankof rent
Bankruptcy
distress, arrears
six
months prior
28.
(But, of course, he
may
sue
Bankruptcy Act, I914, s. 35 (l). (But he may prove in the tenant's bankruptcy for any amount not exceeding six years' arrears.)
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
VI
SELF HELP
Self-defence
76.
A person
is
child, master,
or servant, or
whose
possession
is
justified in
harm
;
or interference.
a,
v. V.
C.
&
P.
R.
Y. B. 21 Hen. VII. (1505) 39 Bush (1798) 8 T. R. 78 ; R. v. Smith (1837) Symondson (1896) 60 J. P. 645.
Seizure of
chattels
77.
may
seize
by force
if necessary;
but no one
may
He may
v.
even enter
Colerick
(1838)
M. & W. 483)
5
(1832)
8 Bing. 186).
Ric. II. (13 81) St. I., c. 8 ; 8 Hen. VI. (1429) c. 9, ss. 2, 7. But the remedy for breach of the statutes is a criminal one ; and, though
the person dispossessed
is
entitled to
if
really
Scott
v.
Brown
Distress
incom6
thereof,
is
Digitized
by Microsoft
SELF HELP
entitled to receive the
83
land,
sell
claim ("Distress").
right extends to
goods fraudulently removed to avoid a dis1 737, s. i) until they have come into the hands of a bona fide purchaser for value. It takes precedence also, subject to various exceptions, of the claims of the tenant's other creditors, and even of his trustee in bankruptcy.]
[The
Rent Act,
2 W. & M. St. I, c. 5 (pr.) as to ordinary rent; Landlord and Tenant Act, 1730, s. 5, as to rents seek; Conveyancing Act, 1881, s. 44, as to other annual charges created after 1 8 8 1 The exercise of the right of distress
.
is
subject to
many
regulations
;
and
restrictions.
or
sum
Acts, 1888 and the distress is levied under the Conveyancing Act, l88l, the rent claimed must be in arrear for twenty-one days.)
of Distress
Law
Amendment
179.
When
Rent-charges
an
instrument
coming
is
into
arrear
operation
for
after
31st
December, 1881,
in
forty
days,
the
may
enter
upon
been
satisfied
may demise
gage,
sale,
arrears thereof,
and
all
future payments to
44
(3) (4).
Digitized
by Microsoft
84
Damage
feasant
LAW OF PERSONS
180.
coming unlawfully thereon, and causing encumbrance or damage, if they are not removed by their owner within a reasonable time (" Distress damage feas^^^^ Seize and
or animals
ant").
But he cannot exercise this right, if he has contributed to the trespass by his own negligence,
remove such chattels or animals but, if thqir presence on the land was due to, his own negligence, he niust remove them in such a manner as not to cause them harm.
any person.
;
He may
also
Ambergate ky. Co. v. Midland Ry. Co. (1853) z EL & Bl. 793; Tyrringham's Case (1585) 4 Rep. at 38 b. Goodwin v. Cheveley (1859) 4 H. & N. 631 ; Boden v. Roscoe [1894] I Q. B. 608. Singleton v. Williamson (1861) 7 H. & N. 410. Fields. Adams (1840) 12 A. & E. 649. Carruthersy. Hollis (i'83$) 8 A. & E. 113.
Overhanging
181.
The
occupier of land
is
justified in cutting
which overhang
to his
his
own
yd [He is not
. ,
growing on them
Yi.
B. 555).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
BOOK
Part
II
OBLIGATIONS
I
SECTION
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
TITLE
182.
or
is
OFFER
is
AND ACCEPTANCE
Contract
contract
the parties to
183.
contract
create a legal
a
Void
contract
termed
" void
84.
contract
parties
is
Voidable
thereto"
may
Digitized
by Microsoft
8^
Unenforcee contract
LAW OF CONTRACT
185.
said to
K. B.
at p.
779.
[For examples of unenforceable contracts see Book I, 158(Limitation of Actions) and 220, 222 below (Statute of Frauds, s. 4; Sale of Goods Act 1893, s. 4)" I" ^^^ ^^^^ ^ ^ statute-barred claim, the contract has become unenforceable by lapse of time. But it is not avoided, and may be revived without fresh consideratipn in accordance with Book I, 160162. The classes of contracts specified in 220 and 222 (below) are
175
requirements ( 222). Nevertheless, even though the evidence of their existence is wanting, they are valid contracts. They create obligations and produce most of the legal consequences of Contracts, so that (e. g.) if the contract is for the
statutory
requisite
of specific goods, the property in the goods passes to the buyer Bigham J., Taylor v. G. E. Ry. Co. [1901] i K. B., at They may be rendered enforceable ex post facto by p. 779). written evidence forthcoming at any time before action brought (See Addendum to Title II of this Section). Finally, neither the lapse of time nor the absence of writing is- available as a defence, unless expressly raised by the pleadings.]
sale
(per
Non"engagemtnts
186. There
f'"^"^
is
no contract
if
it is
to be gathered
language or acts of the parties, or from the circumstances of the ca,se, that the parties did not
^^
lihold (1605)
RoUe, Ab.
6.
[There is little direct authority for this proposition ; but it is presumed that a purely social engagement, e. g. of two persons to dine together, does not produce legal consequences. This is sometimes expressed by the phrase, that an agreement which is to produce legal consequences must be an " act ih the law." (Pollock,
Principles of Contract.) 7th ed. p. 3.)]
Digitized
by Microsoft
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
187. There
is
87
no contract
if
it
is
impossible to Vague
f''""'''"
gather from the language or acts of the parties, or from the circumstances of the case, the nature and
content of the obligation intended to be created.
White
Pearce
V. Bluett
v.
188. There
the parties to
is
no contract
if it
is
left
to
one of
Unascertained
.^^^^^^
Brewer (181 3)
M. &
S.
290.
189.
contract
is
Making of
"''^^'"*
communicated
has accepted
a concurrent
it,
to another an offer,
or
when
expression
of intention, designed
[Our
ance
as constituent
contract, viz. in an agreement for a lease, is inadmissible, as regards the lease itself, to point to one party more than to the other as In such a case, the union of minds takes the offeror or acceptor. the acceptance of an offer, but of a concurrent exform, not of (See Pollock, Principles of Contract, 7th ed. pression of intention.
pp. 6-7.)]
Digitized
by Microsoft
88
Offer
LAW
190.
it is
OF CONTRACT
of an offer takes place
The communication
it is
when
to
whom
made.
V.
Taylor
Laird (1 856) 25 L.
v.
J.
Ex. 329.
Richardson
Mode of communication
191. Subject
to
special
rules
of law, an
offer
may be communicated
written), or
partly
either
by words (spoken or
partly by
by conduct, or
words and
by conduct.
Hart
V.
Mill! (1846)
M. & W.
87.
When
offer
192.
An
offer does
binding
ceptance, and
may
lapse or
be revoked
at
any time
before acceptance.
Offordv. Davies (1862) iz C. B. N.
Dickinson v. Dodds (1876) 2 Ch.
S.
748.
D. 463.
Lapse of
offer
193.
it is
An
offer lapses
fails
when
it
[a)
the person to
whom
made
to accept
manner is prescribed, within a time or in a manner reasonable under the circumstances, [b) the offeree communicates his refusal of the offer, or
or
makes
a counter-offer,
[c]
(3) Hyde v. Wrench (1840) 3 Beav. 334. (f) Dickinson v. Dodds (1876) 2 Ch. D. at p. 475 (death of offeror). Duff's Exors' Case (1886) 32 Ch. D. 301 (death of offeree).
Digitized
by Microsoft
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
194.
89
Revocation
''^''^"'
An
offer
is
known to the offeree that it is no longer open to him to accept it. An offer is deemed to be revoked when the offeror renders it impossible for himself to
act or forbear in terms of his offer,
learns
of
this,
even
from
third
before
acceptance.
1
v. Dodds (1876) 2 Ch. D. 463. Byrne v. Fan Tienhoven C1880) 5 C. P. D. 344. Henthorn v. Fraser [1892] 2 Ch. 27.
Dickinson
[The second
part of the
above rule
is
decision of the Court of Appeal (James and Mellish, L. JJ. Baggallay, J. A,) in Dickinson v. Dodds (1876) 2 Ch. D. 463. This decision has been adversely criticised, but must be accepted as
a
portunity in
some
rightly in-
may
at
he will be
Routledge
Bristol
Bread
when
Acceptance
Digitized
by Microsoft
go
a
l.AyN
OF CONTRACT
in the circumstances
;
manner reasonable
last case,
is
but, in
the
ceptance
communicated
to the' offeror.
Maclver
Brogden
y.
v.
Adams
V.
Richardson (181 j) I M. & S. 557. Metro. Ry. Co. (1877) L. R. 2 App. Ca. 666. Lindsell {\%\'i') i B. & Aid. at p. 683.
Mode of
acceptance
acceptance
may be communicated
either
by words
Ineffectual
197.
An
acceptance
ineffectual.
If the
purports to
accept
subject
to
conditions,
purported
acceptance counts
as a refusal
and
after
as a
new
offer.
purported acceptance
made
an
counts as a
new
Hyde
Lucas
offer.
V.
V.
W'rench (1840)
'3
Beav. 334.
James (1849)
7 Hare, 410.
Acceptance
by post
is
expressly or
offeror,
is
concluded, at
moment when an
Digitized
by Microsoft
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
ance
is
91
delayed or
lost in
the post.
Household Fire Insurance Co. v. Grant (1879) 4 E*- ^- 2' 6. Cozoan v. Qi' Connor (1888) 20 Q. B. D. 640. Henthorn v. Eraser [1892] 2 Ch. 27. In re London i^ Northern Bank [1900] 1 Ch. 220.
199.
When
it
is
to be gathered
from an
offer.
General
"ff^"''
(whether made to a
persons
generally,)
that
to be
bound
of the
to the person
offer
who
terms
without previous
communication of
with
when he
offer,
so
acts or forbears
knowledge of the
Ex p.
Williams v. Carviardine (1833) 4 B. & Ad. 621. Asiatic Banking Co. (1867) L. R. 2 Ch. App. 391. Brogden v. Metro. Ry. Co. (1877) L. R. 2 App. Ca. at p. 691. Carlillv. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] 1 Q^ B. (C. A.) 256.
inchoate
"""'"'"
it
whether they
in-
put
into
such
form.
The mere
parties
being bound,
are
at
they intended to be
so, ai;id if
they
one
as
contract.
Chinnock
Lloyd
y.
Rossiter v. Miller
The Marchioness of Eh (1865) 4 D. J. (1878) L. R. 3'App. Ca. 1 124. Nowell[iig$\ 2 Ch. 744.
v.
&
S.
638.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
specialty
11
FORM AND
under
CONSIDERATION
:
and
" contracts
simple
contracts
in writing
under seal"), or
[b.)
n.
[The text-books speak:also of " contracts of record." But tkese, in so far as thsy are contracts at all, .have ceased to be of practical
importance.]
Promisor
and
promisee
202. Every contract contains a promise or promises. The person who makes a promise is termed " the
promisor."
"
-
The
person to
whom
promise
is
made
is
termed
"the promisee."
In a contract containing reciprocal promises, each
party
is
at
termed a
" covenant," and the promisor and promisee are term;d " coveIn the case of a bond, nantor " and " covenantee " respectively. the corresponding terms are " obligor " and " obligee."]
Nudum
pactum
203.
to
it
No
simple contract
is
is
unless there
Digitized
by Microsoft
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
204.
,
93
is
Except
,
1
as hereinafter
.
mentioned, there
r
said
fa/uaik
consideration
promise
when
1
the
suffers, or
promises, at the
something
in
exchange
Jones V. Ashburnham (1804) 4 East, 455. Currie v. Misa (1875) L- ^' ' Ex. at p. l6z.
Carlillv. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.
[1893]
Q.
B., at p. 2(54.
[There
tion
is
must " move from the promisee " in compositions with creditors. But, though the promise is ostensibly made to the debtor and maybe pleaded by him, it is really made to the other creditors in return for similar promises made by them QVest Yorkshire Darracq Co. v.
;
205.
'
When
'
a consideration consists in
it is
something
'
Executed
'"""',
tory constder"tions
said to
be "executed
:" ""^
when
a consideration consists in a
it is
forbear, or suffer,
executory
consideration
becomes
executed
upon
performance.
[Formerly the terms "executed" and "executory" were often itself. This practice is to be deprecated. Every contract is, in its nature, executory. When it has been Ed.] completely executed, it ceases to exist.
applied to the contract
'
Fast
con-
is
no consideration for
is
a sub-
Digitized
by Microsoft
94
LAW OF CONTRACT
Kaye
[It
is
v.
Logan (1839) 5 M. &' W. 241. Thomas (1842) 3 Q. B. 234. Button (1844) 7 M. & Gr.Soy.
V.
sometimes
said
that
may
(See
was done or forborne at the promisor's request. Bate (1568) 3 Dyer 272 a; LampUigh v. Braithwait (1614) Hob. 105; Thornton v. Jenyns (1840) i M. & G. 166.) But quaere whether this is so, unless the request in substance amounts to an offer, the term^ of which are repeated or defined in the subsequent undertaking {Wilkinson v. Oliveira (1835) i Bing. N. C. 490 ; Kennedy v. Brown (1863) 13 C. B. N. S. 677),]
act or forbearance
Hunt
v.
Inadequacy
sideratkn
207.
It
is
of which
it is
given.
(1839) 10 A.
Haigh
V. Broois
v.
&
E. 309.
p.
Westlake
Bolton V.
265.
Abandonment- of claims
208.
The abandonment
of a right or bona
fide
claim,
may
be a
Mather
Digitized
by Microsoft
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
209.
95
Reasonable
What
Older shaw
is
is
v.
a reasonable a question
King (1857)
ing of 208,
of fact in each
zH. &
N.,
at p.
"^'
<!>.'
524.
'J
210.
When, by
whole or
in part,
is
no consideration
Pinnell's Case
Rep. 117.
Fitch V. Sutton
Crowhurst
Fraser
v.
5 East,
211.
An
is
act
or forbearance which,
is
contrary
illegal
"^'^'
'^^^
thereof,
no consideration.
Collins V. Blantern
Jones V. Lev^ V.
(1766) z Wils. 341. T. R. 17. Ashburtiham (1804) 4 East, 455. Yates (1838) 8 A. & E. 129.
'
We'llsv. Foster
{\%\\)%M.. hV^:
151.
n^'-
>
'1
212.
A promise
is
is
impossible
""'"'^"''>-
promised
at the
Lord Raym.
595.
164.
C. P.,
at p.
588
li
Digitized
by Microsoft
96
specialty
contract
LAW OF CONTRACT
213.
is
valid
tain
damages, not specific performance or injunction. Jefferys v. Jefferys (1841) Cr. & Ph. 138.
Walrond\. Walrond (1858) Johns.
In re Lucan (1890) 4; Ch. D. 470.
18.
[The existence of an illegal consideration of course renders the alleged contract void (Collins v. Blantern {1766) 2 Wils. 341).]
Legal form
2I4. If a contract
is
the contract
V.
is
expressed accordingly.
3
Exch. 283.
Young
Mayor
etc. 'of
Learningtoh (1883) L. R. 8
Formal
tract
,,
con\
215.
or'
specialty contract
papefr
the direction
it.
Wright
Harben
\.
Freshfieldy.
v.
Barlow (18 15) 3 M. &S. 512. Reed (1842) 9 M. & W. 404. Phfllips (1883) 23 Ch. D. (C. A.) 14.J
Delivery
^16.
specialty contract
is
said to
be delivered
it
of specialty
contract
when
to
it
Digitized
by Microsoft
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
deed
ficient
(^)
97
words or conduct.
Sheppard, Touchstone, pp- 57, 58. Xenos V. Wkkham (1866) L. R. z H. L.
at p.
312.
217.
specialty contract
may be
(Book
I,
lo).
It is
Wkkham
(1866) L. R. 2 H. L.
at p.
323.
is
to be executed
by
Counterf"^''
party,
it
is
sufficient if
each party
is
unilateral,
it
binds
moment of
unaware of
delivery, even
its
Unilateral """''"^"
existence
receiving notice of
its
ab
initio.
A unilateral
by the promisee.
Butler's and Baker's Case (1591) 3 Rep. 25. Hallv. Palmer (1844) 13 L. J. Ch. 352.
Xenos
220. Subject to the provisions of 221, a contract is unenforceable whereby a person (tf) being an
to
Requirement
'J
^''"'"^
executor
or
administrator,
expressly
promises
[b)
own
estate;
ex-
E 2
Digitized
by Microsoft
gS
LAW OF CONTRACT
answer for the debt, default, or
;
pressly promises to
miscarriage of another
sideration of marriage
interest
(c)
makes
oi"
promise in conany
(^)
(c/);.promises to transfer
in
a
lands tenements
hereditaments;
makes
must
memorandum
or
note thereof
in writing, signed
whom
(a)
it
is
(i)
'
'
'Donellan v.
fact
Read (1832)
that
it
B.
&
is
Ad. 899.
determinable within
v.
[The'
contract
the
year,
falling
Liverpool
(1829) 9 B. & C. 392). A contract to serve for a year .from to-morrow is not within the clause QSmitIo v: Gold Coast L''. [1903] I K. B. 285.)] fll ;. .uq-.
Part performance
221.
j^^^
If,
in the case of
(<z)
there
enforce
[hi)
is
such
as
would,
if
Court;
[c) it
would under
defendant
;
the circumstances
to
avail
be
fraudulent in the
and
Digitized
by Microsoft
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
[d)
99
evidence
may
as a
not avail
ground of
M. R.
Wigram
(1798)
3 Ves. at p.
5
Dale
V.
Hare,
at p.
L. C.
Maddison
(3)
v. Alderson (1883) L. R..8 App. Ca. 479. (1889) 43 Ch. D. 208. Britain v. Rossiter (1882) 11 Q. B. D. 123.
Gray
v.
^mith
v. Cooke (1887) 35 Ch. D. 697. Fry, Specific Performance (4th ed.) p. 262. (f) Catoti V. Caton (1865) L. R. i Ch. App. 137.
McManus
Morgan
v.
Milman (1853)
De G. M. & G.
33.
222.
Sale of
"'"^
/-"/J"
some note or memorandum in writing of the contract is made and signed by the party against
or unless
'
whom
it
is
that behalf.
Sale of
s.
4. subs. i.
223.
The
provisions of the
last
some
fit
future
" ^'"'
Digitized
by Microsoft
lOO
LAW OF CONTRACT
requisite
may be
thereof, or
the
Sale of
s.
4, subs. 2.
Acceptance
ds
224. There
is
meaning of
222,
when
ing contract of
in
sale,
4, subs. 3.
Indirect en-
225.
owing
to
forcement
the absence of the requirements of 220 and 222, may nevertheless be valid in other respects.
Leroux
v.
Brown (1852) iz C.
B. 801.
Britain v. Rossiter (1882) 11 Q. B. D. 123. Maddison y. Alderson (1883) L. R. 8 App. Ca., at p. 474. Taylor v. G. E. Ry. Co. [1901] i K. B., at p. 779.
Marine
insurance
226.
such insurance
referred to
in
s.
506 of the
it
valid unless
93.
Addendum to Title
Meaning of "note or memoran-
II.
[In 220 and 222 the words "note or memorandum in writing " include any printed or written documents, from which all the
may be
v.
collected (')
more
lo.
especially the
dum"
Wain
Warlters (1804)
5 East,
Digitized
by Microsoft
')
FORMATION OF CONTRACT^^'>
parties C"), the subject matter the promise of the party sued.
C^),
oi
for
and
the consideration
('')
But, in the case of a contract to answer for. the debt default or miscarriage of another, it is not required that the consideration should appear in writing ().
(b)
(c)
Shardlow
(d)
(e)
Wain
v.
Mercantile
Law Amendment
is
Act, 1856,
s.
3.
When
is
the contract
to
it
Several
It is corporates, directly or by reference, the essential terms C^). not necessary that the signature should be placed at the end of the
document but it must be of such a character and so placed as to A name connect the signer with the whole of the contract ().
;
printed
sufficient
signature for
(g)
Ridgway v. Wharton (1857) 6 H. L. C. 238. Jones V. Victoria Graving Dgck Co. (1877) 2 Q. B. D. 314. Johnson v. Dodgson (1837) z M. & W. 659. Foster v. Mentor Life Assurance Co. (1854) 3 E. & B. 48. Caton V. Caton (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 127.
Schneider
(h)
&
S.
P. 238.
286.
Tourret
v.
Cripps (1879) 4^ L-
J-
Ch. 567.
It is sufficient if
the parties, though not named, are so described Description and certainly {'). For this pur- of parties
The same principle applies also pose oral evidence is admissible. It is not matter (J) and to the consideration (''). necessary that the documents containing the terms of the contract should have been made for the purpose of supplying evidence of the
to the subject
(').
Potter V. Duffield {i^-ji^) L. R. 18 Eq. 4. Commins v. Scott (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 15. Rossiter v. Miller (1878) L. R. 3 App. Ca.
Ogilvie
V.
124.
(j)
Owen V. Thomas (1834) 3 My. & K. 353. M' Murray v. Spicer (1868) L. R; 5 Eq. 527.
Haigh v. Brooks (1839) 10 A. & E. 309. Buxton \. Rust (1872) L. R. 7 Ex. i, and 279.
'
(k)
(1)
Digitized
by Microsoft
I02
Date of
writing
^
LAW OF CONTRACT
is
'
documents produced of the contract, or even with the object of repudiating it, provided t"hat they are of such a character as to supply evidence of its terms (") and were made Oral evidence is admissible to connect before action brought (). two or more documents (p), provided that it obviously appears from the documents themselves that they refer to one another (i). It seems that letter and' envelope may be treated as together constiIt
all
(") of the
in
evidence were
made
tuting a single
document Q.
1
1
(m) Sievewright
v. Archibald ( 1 8 5 ) 1 7 Q. B., at p. 1 {n)-Baiiey v. Sweeting (1861) 9 C. B. N. S. 843. (o) Billy, Bament (1841) 9 M. & W. 36. Lucas w. Dixon (1889) zz Q. B. D. 357.
4.
(p)
Ridgway
Long
V.
v.
Wharton (1853)
De G. M. & G.
677.
Millar (1879) 4 C. P. D. 454. Taylor v. Smith [1893] z Q. B. (C. A.) 65. (q) Boydell v. Drummond (1809) 11 East, 142. (r) Pearcew. Gardner \_lig-]'\ i Q. B. 688.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
II
PARTIES TO A CONTRACT
227. There must be
contract.
Faulkner v. Lowe (1848) 2 Exch. 595. Grey v. Ellhon (1856) Giff. 438.
[
at least
two
228.
It
is
promisee should be
known
;
time of contracting
Dodd (1881) 52 L.
Asiatic
J.
Ch. 39.
Ex parte
Strangers
to
and
to the
assignment of contracts
by act
contract
or
incur contractual
is
liabilities
under
a contract to
which he
not a party.
\ Price V. Easton (1833) 4 B & Ad. 433. (rights) Tweddle v. Atkinson (1861) i B. & S. 393. [ Eley V. Positive Life Assur. Co. (1876) i Ex. D. 88. )
")
^ J
.liabilities)
E 3
Digitized
by Microsoft
104
Marriage
LAW OF CONTRACT
When
a Settlement
is
230.
made in contemplation
may
en-
New steady.
Gale
V.
[The rule appears to extend to the children of a widow by a But see J. G. v. Jacobsformer marriage {Gale v. Gale., ubi sup.). It does not extend to the Smith [1895] 2 Q. B., at p. 349. IVells (1887) 37 Ch. children of a widower {Re Cameron
&
D.
32).]
Right
sue
to
231. Subject as aforesaid ( 229 230), the parties to a contract cannot, unless authorised by
statute,
&
confer
upon
third
person
the right of
it
own name.
Tweddle v. Atkinson {i%6\) I B. & S. 393. Gray v. Pearson (1870) L. R. 5 C. P. 568,
be found
Act, 1845, s. 5, which enables a person, not to take the benefit of a covenant in it " respecthereditaments." good example of exercise found in Dyson v. Forster [1909] A. C. 98.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
III
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
TITLE
232.
I.
DUTY
OF PERFORMANCE
Perfot
The
excused from performance, perform their respective duties under the contract.
Cranky
Haldane
v.
Hillary (1813) 2
M. &
S., at p.
izz.
v.
233.
The
Extent of
P^'f"'""""^
due from each party are determined by the words and conduct of the parties
usage and law.
Mitchell (l Si ^) 4 Campb. 146. v. Dale (1857) 7 E. & B. 266. Tucker v. Linger (1883) L. R. 8 App. Ca. 508. Bl. Comtn. Ill, 443. Meyer v. Dresser (1864) 16 C. B. N. S. 660.
Raitt
V.
as interpreted
by reference
to
Humfrey
Compii 'etion
fotmance
Q.
B. 786.
'^
,
Richardson v. Barnes (i 849) 4 Exch. 128. Parry v. Great Ship Co. (1863) 4 B. & S. 556.
J,,
[Where a contract for work and labour for a lump sum has been substantially but not completely performed, the party performing is entitled to recover the price less an abatement, for the deficiency (Dakin v. Ltf [1916] 1 K. B. 566).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
io6
Conditions
LAW OF CONTRACT
When
that
235.
is
such
cannot be rendered
other,
without the
party,
is
concurrence
if
of the
the
first-named
to the other,
dis-
may
sue
him.
Startup V. Macdonald {li^'i) 6
M. & G.,
at p.
6io.
This
debt,
applies to a tender
of payment of a money
not
inconsistent
in
so
far
as
it
is
with
239-245.
Jones V. Barkley (1781) z Dougl. 659. Smith V. Wilson (1807) 8 East, 437. Bankart v. Bozvers (1866) L. R. i C.
P.
484.
Strictness of
236. Such
strictly in
tender
must be
unconditional,
and
tract
and willing to do, everything necessary on his part to the complete performance of the contract.
Laing v. Header (1824) i C. & P. Z57. Foordw. Noll (1842) 2 Dowl. N. S. 614.
Mode of
237.
tender must be
as
made
at
such manner
whom
it
is
made a reasonable opportunity of ascertaining whether it is made in accordance with the contract.
Ishervjood
s.^
Whitmore (1843) 11 M.
& W.
347^^
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
238.
107
Concurrence
"ft^''''' ?<"':!
When
performance
effect
(in
parties)
that
the third
person
s.
756.
Tenders of
""""'^
payment does not discharge the debtor but tender of payment duly made, and followed by a continued readiness to pay, will, if the amount of the debt is paid into Court, be a good defence to an action for
;
non-payment.
Dixon V. Clarke (1848) 5 C. B., at p. 377. Kinnaird V. Trollope (1889) 42 Ch. D. 610.
240.
A
is
tender of payment
is
Production
"^""'"^y
money
Patrick (1790) 3
l
T. R. 683.
Brook (1834)
Scottf at p. 76.
[This rule is not strictly followed in the case of redemptions of mortgages {Graham v. Seal (1919) 88 L. J. Ch. 31).]
241. Tender of payment must be made in current Medium coin of the United Kingdom, Bank of England Notes,
or in other
of
medium
authorised, by law.
&
J.
15.
Digitized
by Microsoft
io8
LAW OF CONTRACT
Notjes are legal tender for any
itself.
[Bank of England
five
1833,
s.
6.)
the Coinage Act, 1870, s. 4, gold coins are legal tender to any amount, silver coins up to, forty shillings, bronze coins up to
By
one
shilling.
same Act, the Crown in Council is empowered in any foreign country shall be a legal tender, to direct the establishment of a branch of the Mint in any British possession, and to determine the extent to which coins issued
By
s.
II of the
therefrom are to be legal tender. tender in country bank-notes, or by a cheque on a banker, is good, if the creditor objects only to the amount and not to the quality of the tender. (JPolglass v. Oliver (1831) 2 Cr. & J. 15 Jones \f. Arthur (1840)18 J^Owl. 442).]
'
'
ji'nyf;
Change
a greater
debtor
the creditor
is
v^.J
Wade's Case (1600) 5 Rep. 115 a. V. Patrick (1700) 3 T. R. 683. Betterbee w. Davis {18 11) 3 Campb. 70. Robinson v. Cook (1815) 6 Taunt. 336.
-
,q..-
-.
Interest
243.
all interest, if
any, due
upon the
Norton
v.
made
prevents the
Ellam (1837) 2 M. & W., at p. 463. Kinnairdw. Trollope (1889) 42 Ch. D. 610. Bank of N. S. Wales v. O'Connor (1889) L. R. 14 App. Ca.
p.
284.
Refusal of
tender
244.
creditor
who
refuses a tender of
payment
on
a specified ground,
cannot afterw^ards
justify his
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
refusal
109
forward
time of
refusal.
& W.
298.
245.
a
An
offer to
pay
Conditional
'^^ ""
but
mere request
for a receipt
not a condition,
Jones V. Arthur (1840) 8 Dowl. 442. Richardson v. Jackson (1841) 8 M. & W. 298.
[A person
ment of
fine
a debt
upon payliable to a
amounting
to
is
often pounds.
103.)]
246.
Set-off
but he
may
avail
by the
(1861) lo
& W.
B. 639.
R. 135.
247.
a
When
action
is
Foreign
'"''''^'"y
sum of money
sum
rate of
exchange
at
the date
when payment
fell
due,
Digitized
by Microsoft
no
or, in
LAW OF CONTRACT
the case of an action upon a foreign judgment,
at the date
&
i
Alternative
'performance's
is
to
elect
alternative.
Election,
made,
is
irrevocable.
a.
Layton
' '
v.
Pearce (1778)
Dougl. 15.
1
Brown
V. Roya'/
hs.'Co.>(iSS9)'
'.
&
E. 853'.
Performance
by agent
''
language of the
parties, or the
perform his
by' a sefvant
agent.
Such
a'
contrary intention
presumed, in
between the
personal
British
parties, or
. ,
skill.
,r
>
Waggon
Q.
B.
D. 149.
Liability of
in,
represen atives
deceased jcjebtor.
ar.e
Any
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
Pinchon' s Case (i6iz) 9 Rep. 86 b.
Pf^ills V.
iii
Finlay
v.
Enforcement
^^(^[il]^
Such
contrary intention
is
presumed
in
duty
involving
personal
confidence
between
the
parties.
Wills V. Murray, ubi sup.
is
fixed
by the
at
Place of
f^'^J'"'"^'"'"
performance
must
be
rendered
that
is
fixed
by the
Creditor's
bound
the creditor,
and make or
creditor
is
tender
duly
made
is
excused.
Litt.
Co.
zio
b.
Haldane
Digitized
by Microsoft
112
Delivery
LAW OF CONTRACT
of goods
any place being expressly or by implication appointed for delivery, the promisor may require the promisee
to appoint a proper place
w^ill
p.
379.
785.
[If delivery is to be made in pursuance of a contract of sale, the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act, 1893, s. 29 (i) apply(See^oj-Z, Pa'rt II,
388396).]
Time of performance
255.
When
is
time
is
fixed, at or
within which
performance
to take place,
at or
performance or tender
[As to the
agreed, see
efFect
I
of non-performance'
at
or within
the
time
Book
115, 116.]
Reasonable
time
256.
When
no time
is
the circumstances of the case. What time is a question of fact in each case.
Hick
V.
is
a reasonable
Raymond [1893] A. C.
z2.
Carlton Co. v. Castle Mail Coi [1898] A. C. 486. Sale of Goods Act, 1893, s. 29 (2).
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
257.
113
or
Demand
a question
Sale of
be made
at a reasonable hour.
What
case.
is
a reasonable TJj!
"-^
hour
is
of fact in each
M. & G.
(4.).
593.
258.
When
time
is
Extension
'""''
(Book I, 115), an extension of the time of per- ^ formance by request or agreement only substitutes,
in the absence
of expression to the
contrary, the
fixed,
without
Messenger (1874) 43 L.
J.
Ch. 449.
259.
When
a debtor,
to one person,
owing several distinct debts makes him a' payment, either with
is
Appropria*l^efil'''^'
^^l'*"'
payment
to
Simson
v.
Nash
V.
at p.
72.
at p.
&
G.,
487.
260.
When
Appropria'^"J-^/,^"^' creditor
and there are no other circumstances indicating, to which debt the payment is to be applied, the creditor
may
at
it
at
his option to
any
Digitized
by Microsoft
114
LAW OF CONTRACT
to.
him from
though
it is
Mer. 572.
The Mecca [1897] A. C. 286. Wright V. Laing (1824) 3 B. & C. 165. Mills V. Fozaies (1839) S ^'"g- N. C. 455. MayfieUv. Wadsley (1824) 3 B. & C. 362 (per Abbot C.
E. 41. Philpott V. Jones (1834) 2 A. Seymour v. Pickett [1905] I K. B. 715.
J.)
&
Unappropriatedpayments.
261.
^^^
payment
debts in
date, the
order of date.
payment
is
proportionately.
Clayton's Case, ubi sup.
Favenc
V.
Y^iere whether,
law
in discharge
in such a case, the payment is ever applied by of statute-barred debts, or debts otherwise unen-
forceable.
Account
current
262.
Where
there
is
tween the
at the
parties, or separate
entire account,
to
the
earlier
at p.
608.
Fields. Carr (1828) 5 Bing., at p. 15. City Discount v. McLean (1874) L. R. 9 C. P. 692. The Mecca [1897] A. C. 286.
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
263.
ditional
115
Request for
P^''f'"''"''""
The
duty of performance
upon an antecedent
a contrary
but, unless
intention
appears from
the
no request or demand of performance is necessary, and action may be brought immediately that performance falls due.
tract,
Birksy. Trippett (1666) i Wms. Saund. 33. Walton \. Mascall (1844) 13 M. & W., at p. 458. Norton v. Ellam (1837) 2 M. & W. 464.
264.
,.
.
When
,
ditional
upon
is
11 the happenmg
.
the
duty
of
performance
c oi
is
conthe
,1
Conditional
'^
some
event,
performances ^
debtor
either
or (b) he has stipulated for notice the event lies within the peculiar knowledge of the
{a\
creditor.
Vpe
V.
Makin
V.
265. Unless the law specially provides otherwise. or there is an express or implied agreement /or interest in the contract, a debtor is not liable to pay
simple or
Interest
compound
interest
C')
on
his debt
(=)
(*).
or
compound
interest
may be
inferred
Digitized
by Microsoft
ii6
(a)
LAW OF CONTRACT
de Bernales v. Fuller
(1810)
Campb. 426.
Page
V.
Newman (1829)
9 B.
&
C. 378.
(b) Calton V.
{c)
Bragg (1812) 15 East, 223. Bruce v. Hunter (18 1 3) 3 Campb. 467. Eaton V. Bell (1821) 5 B. St Aid. 34. ' Moore y. Voughton (1816) i Stark. 487. Fergusson v. i^jj^? ( 1 841) 8 CI & F., at p. 140.
at the
[See
Addendum
end of
this Title.]
is
deemed
to accrue
at fixed
from day
intervals,
to day,
and
is
2.
Separable
may be
is
recovered
debt
(^).
from
principal
When
(a)
barred, the
barred with
it
C').
,(b)
Hudson v. Fawcett (1844) 7 M. & G. 348. Nordenstrom v. Pitt (1845) 13 M. & W. 723. Hollis V. Painter (1836) 2 Bing. N. C, at p. 717.
Rate
268.
The
parties to a contract
may
rate of interest
the case
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
269.
117
asinterest as
When
may
if
an action
is
brought to recover an
when
as
acting as
^''""'^"
allow interest
damages
:
a rate not
[a)
at
instrument
at
certain
time,
from
such
time
(^)
if
the debt
is
the
when demand of payment been made in writing. Such demand must give notice to the
time
interest will
have
debtor that
until the
time of payment.
Restate Fire
Insce.' Co.
Ex parte
Lintott
28.
L. J.
Ch. 22.
at the rate
of
interest on
-^^ ^'"'^'^
centum per annum from the time of entering up the judgment until the same is satisfied and such interest may be levied under a writ of executioh on such judgment.
;
'
[This
does not apply to County Court judgments, unless and removed into the High Court. {Reg. v. Essex C. C.
(1887) 18 Q. B. D. 704).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
ii8
LAW OF CONTRACT
Addendum to Title
1.
The
noted.
may be
By the Law Mer1 Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes. chant and by statute (Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, s. 57 (i) ) these In the absence' of express carry interest without express agreement. agreement for interest, interest runs only "from the time of presentment for payment, if the bill is payable on demand,, and from the maturity of the bill in any other case "' (Bills of Exchange Act, But " where a bill, is expressed to be pay1882, s. 57 (i) (b) ). able with interest, unless the instrument otherwise provides, interest runs from the date of the bill, and if the bill is undated, from the issue thereof" (ibid. s. 9 (3) ). In this case, the agreed interest is recoverable until the maturity of the bill or note, as part of the debt, and not as damages {Florence v. 'Jenings (1857) ^ ^" ^- ^" ^ After maturity, interest is in each case recoverable as 454). damages only. " Such interest may, if justice require it, be withheld wholly or in part and, where a bill is expressed to be payable with interest at a given rate, interest as damages may or may not be given at the same rate as interest proper " (Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, s. 57 (3) ) ("Bill" includes "note" (s. 89) ). The rate, if any, expressed in the instrument is presumptively the measure of damages {Keene v. Keene (1857) 3 ^' ^- N- S- ^44)Contracts to pay a debt by bill or note. Interest is recoverable 2. in the same manner as if the bill or note had been duly given {Lowndes v. Collens (1810) 17 Ves. 27) Sutton v. Morgan (1814)
;
5 Taunt. 758.
3.
sum due on an
money
lent
from the date of the statement {Blaney v. Hendricks But see the remarks of Lord.Ellenborough, (1771) 2 W. Bl. 761. C. J., in Calton v. Bragg (18 1 2) 15 East, 223).
carries interest
who, owing to the default of his principal, is comsum of money* is entitled to recover from the principal interest on the sum so paid, from the date of payment \Petre v. Buncombe (1851) 20 L. J. Q. B. 242). 5. A bond with a penalty conditioned for the payment of money carries interest, in the absence of provision to the contrary, from
4. yi surety
pelled to pay a
the time of the obligor's default (4 single bond does not carry interest
&
Anne
v.
c.
16,
s.
13).
i
A
B.
{Hogan
Page (1798)
P-
337>
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
\
119
Interest is payable upon the of land. purchase-money from the time fixed for completion of the purchase, or from the time of the vendor making a good title, whichever is
6.
is entitled to take possession before be liable to pay interest from that time (^Esdaile v. Stephenson (1822) I Sim. S. 122, followed in fones v. Afudd (^iSzj') 4 Russ. 118), provided that a good title has then
completion,
when he
will
&
been made. Interest is also payable upon the lien for the return of a deposit or of purchase-money which arises upon a rescission of the contract of sale {Whitbread v. Watt [1901] i Ch. gii, affirmed [1902] i Ch. 835), and on the vendor's lien for unpaid purchase-money (Re Stucley (1905) XXII T. L. R. 33).
The
varies
is
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE
Breach of
'2ri\.
When
is
a party to a contract,
from
whom perper-
formance
fails to
form
broken.
Jnticipatory
272.
When
is
a party to a contract
from
whom per-
formance
[a)
ables
promise,
the
other party
may
v.
at
broken
{a)
thereupon determined.
(b~)
Delatour (1853) z E. & B. 678. R. 7 Ex. 114. Johnstone v. Milling (1886) 16 Q. B. D. (C. A.) 460. Lovelock v. Franklyn (1846) 8 Q. B. 371
Hochster
Frost V. Knight(i'iii) L.
Synge
V.
Synge '\_iSg^']
Q.
v.
[But {semble) if a party temporarily disables himself from performing an act due at a fixed future date, there is no breach. {Lovelock V. Franklyn, uhi sup., pfer Lord Dennian, C. J., at
P-
378-)]
Damages
rise to
an ac-
damages
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
are recoverable other than the
if any.
Marzettiy. Williams (1830) i B. & Ad. 415. Godefroy v. Jay (1831) 7 Bing. 413. WallisM. Smith (1882) 21 Ch. D. 243, />^r Jessel, M. R.
121
interest
sum
itself,
and
274.
is
When a
contract
is
Measure of
""'"^'^
put
him
in the
same
position
Lock
V.
p.
451.
[Contracts for the sale and purchase of real estate which go off because the vendor fails to make a title, are an exception. The purchaser may, in the absence of agreement to the contrary, re-
cover the amount of the deposit he has paid, together with interest, and the expenses of investigating the title, if any ; he cannot obtain compensation in damages for the loss of his bargain.
Flureau v. Thornhill (1776) 2 W. Bl. 1078. Lock V. Furxe, ubi sup. Ramsden v. Dyson (1866) L. R. i H. L. 129. Bain v. Fothergill {\i-j \) L. R. 7 H. L. 158.
V.
Faher (1916) 60
But the exception does not apply to any other breaches {Keek Sol. Jo. 253), nor where the vendor ought to have
title
275.
When
the breach
is
is
in
is
Anticipatory
'""''^"
is
entitled to such
damages
as
would
the
appointed time.
In calculating such
to
any circumstances
Digitized
by Microsoft
122
LAW OF CONTRACT
mitigatloss.
Frost V. Knight
Michael
Remoteness
of damage
loss
was
[a)
or
the time of
result
as
the probable
of
a breach.
Hadley v. Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch. 341. Gee V. Lanes. &> York. Ry. Co. (i860) 6 H. & N.. at p. 220. Simpson v. L. dv N. W. Ry. Co. (1876) 1 Q. B. D. 274. Lepla V. Rogers [1893] I Q. B. 31. Agius V. G. IV. Colliery Co. [1899] i Q. B. 312.
The
Hobbs
is
matter of law.
Q.
B., at p. 122.
L.
&
S.
W. Ry.
Co. (1875) L. R. 10
the bailee of an article deals with it in a manner inconwith the terms of the bailment, and damage follows, such damage is deemed to be the natural and direct consequence of the breach of contract, unless the damage would have inevitably happened in any event (Lilley v. Doubleddy (1881) 7 Q. B. D. 510).]
sistent
[Where
Mental
distress
277-
Damages
of
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
plaintiff
123
Inconven-
may be
V.
taken
into
account
in
assessing
damages.
Hobbs
L.
Jg"
S.
Phillips V. L.
&
S.
C.
P.
D. z8o.
279. Damages
well as for
may be claimed
accrued
at
Prospective
''""'^"
280.
When
assessed
in
an
Subsequent
loss
subsequent
Gibbs
V.
loss arising
Phillips V. L.
at p. 87.
281.
.
.
When
a party to a contract
is
1
injured party
may
sood breach *
of his damages
so.
Hamlin v. G. N. Ry. Co. (1856) 1 H. & N. 408. Prehn v. Royal Bank 0/ Liverpool {1S70) L. R. 5 Ex. 92. N. W. Ry. Co. (1876) i C. P. D., at Le Blanche v. L. Ex parte Bank of Brazil [1893] 2 Ch. 438.
p. 31.
Digitized
by Microsoft
124
Mitigating
loss
LAW OF CONTRACT
A
party to a contract
is
282.
bound
If
to take
all
upon
do
he neglects
to
so,
Dunkirk
Colliery Co. v.
at p.
25.
Mitigation
283. In
an
action
for
of
of damages
contract, the
defendant
may prove
mitigation
plaintiff
on the part of
Allen
Nominal damages
if
the
he will be entitled only to nominal damages. In such a case, the Court will somepreciable
in fact,
damage
285.
When
a case
is
tried
by
damages are
assessed
by the
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
Hohhs
Fremont (1853) 9 Exch., at p. 32. y S. W. Ry. Co. (1875) L. R. 10 Q. Chaplin v. /^jf/fj [191 1] 2 K. B. 786.
V.
125
Gibbs
V. L.
B., at p. 122.
286.
breach of contract
may
specific
f"'-'"''"''""
performance
in cases in
compensation.
Nutbrown v. Thornton (1804) 10 Ves. 161.. Ryan v. Mutual Tontine Association [1893] i Ch. (C. A.)
at p.
126.
Contracts
'l^f^l^gJi^
and marriage
articles, are
specifically enforce-
satisfy
the requirements of
220221.
Adderley v. Dixon (1824) ' S. & S. 607. Caton V. Caton (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 127.
288.
The Court
Contracts not
'l'f^l''eJif.
relating to movables
if
it
by
its
that
the
contract
shall
be performed
Digitized
by Microsoft
126
Discretion
LAW OF CONTRACT
It lies
289.
in
the
judicial
discretion
of the
specific
Court to
grant
or refuse
the
remedy of
Ch. (C. A.),
performance
Ryati V.
Mutual Tontine
Association
[1893]
at p.
126.
may
be re-
Manser
v.
(b)
Fraud;
Higgins
V. v.
Mullens
(c)
Misrepresentation
Lamare
v.
Redgrave
v.
(d)
Concealment of
facts
which
;
it
(1785)
(e)
Delay or
failure
by the
plaintiff in
performing
Milward
Clarke
v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
(f )
127
Any
it
inequit-
The Court will not decree specific performance of a contract for personal service, or of any con290.
tract
Contracts for
f'^^"^^
which
it
for the
Rayner
Court to enforce
v. Stone (1762) 2 Eden, 128. Moseley v. Vitgin (1796) 3 Ves. 184. Wolverhampton Ry. Co. v. Z. fs" N. W. Ry. Co. (1873) L- R- 16 Eq. 439. Rigiy V. Connol (1880) 14 Ch. D., at p. 487, per Jessel, M. R. Bairtlv. fTells (1890) 44 Ch. D. 661.
[As a general rule, contracts to build fall within this clause but where a person has contracted to build on a piece of land according to certain detailed plans, and has obtained a conveyance or lease of the land on the terms that he will do so, a decree of specific performance will be granted, if the remedy in damages would not be adequate. {Wolverhampton Corpn. v. Etn?nons [1901J i Q. B. 515; Molyneux v. Richard [1905] W. N. 164.) And the same rule applies where a railway company has acquired land in consideration of undertaking to execute specific works upon it {Jersey v. G. W. Ry. Co. [1894] 3 Ch. 625, n).]
;
291.
The Court
Gratuitous
tuitous promises,
though under
nor contracts
""^^"'^^
Hercy
Digitized
by Microsoft
128
Infants
LAW OF CONTRACT
An
infant cannot obtain a decree of specific
292.
4 Russ. 298.
[This
is
his contracts.]
Injunction
293.
When
may be
capable
of being
specifically enforced,
v. Wagner (1852) i De G. M. & G. 604. Whitwood Chemical Co. v. Hardman [1891] z Ch. (C. A.) 416. .Holfordw. Acton Urban District Council [1898] z Ch. 240.
Lumley
[A
I
if
it
is
in eiFect negative,it
be
is
a con-
of personal service.
Tourle (1869) L. R.
4 Ch. App.
654 Whitwood, Chemical Co. v. Hardman, uhi sup.) But the Court is reluctant to grant an injunction at all in a contract for personal -services, especially if it would have the effect, if obeyed, of compelling the defendant to perform his contract under pain of losing
his livelihood
(Chapman
v. Wistefby' (1914)
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
III
IMPOSSIBILITY
is
OF
PERFORMANCE
294.
contract
void
if
the performance of
it is
impossibility
"'
"l^,^"'""'
of
facts
known
Clifford \.
to
both
Watts (1871) L. R.
C.
P., at p.
588.
Harvey
[Apparently,
to
v.
when the facts causing the impossibility in law are one party only, that party cannot sue upon the contract but the other party can sue. {Wild v. Harris (1849) 7 C- ^ Millward v. Littlewood (1850) 20 L. J. Ex. a.) ] ; 999
known
than
Foreign law
as
impossibility of fact.
V.
296.
contract, performance of
which
is,
at
the
impossibility
time of concluding it, impossible in fact, is not void ;W unless the parties contracted conditionally
upon
performance being
possible
in
fact.^*")
But
by
a
it
party who,
at
it,
knew of the
W.
487.
impossibility.^'^
{a)
(i)
(f)
Marquis of Bute v. Thompson (1844) 13 M. & Hills V. Sughrue (1846) 15 M. & ,W. 253, Cliffords. Watts (1871) L. R. 5 C. P. 577. Sale of Goods Act, 1893 s. 6. Cunningham v. Dunn (1878) 3 C. P. D. 443.
F3
Digitized
by Microsoft
ijo
Supervening
impossi
t
LAW OF CONTRACT
A
Contract for a performance which, at the
is
297.
jjjj^g
ity
possible in
law and
in fact, but
o,\A
V,
J^s^ (1647) Aleyn 26,4 Royal Insurance Co. (1S59) ' E. & E., at p. 859. Arthur v. Wynne (1880) 14 Ch. D, 603. Nickolly. Ashtan, Edridge and Co. [1901] z K. B. (C. A.) 126. Krellw. HenrylKjOi] 2 K, B. (C. A.), at p. 748,
Paradine
y.
,
v.
unless
(a)
j^j,
'.'
(1869) L. R. 4 Q. B, 180.
(b)
'-
'i.-.H
'
Such, an iht.ention
(i)
is
presumed
of
,,
possibility
performance
was
r or state of things,
to exist;
Taylor vl Caldwell (1863) 3 B. & S. 826. Afpleby v. Myers (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 651. Boast V. Firth (1868) L. R. 4 C. P. 1. Krell V. Henry, ubi sup.
,,
Sale, of
s.
7.
.,
^
(2)
when
vices to be rendered
by one of the
parties,
illness
of that patty.
Roiinson, v. Davison
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
(3)
131
when,
in a
to
or
so
difficult that,
fore-
seen,
no reasonably prudent
it
undertaken
Jackson
V.
(1874) L. R. 10 C. P. 125.
A. C. 486.
298.
When
either of
two
alternatives
is
to
be peris
One aitema'IJfJZiTinz
formed
at
law or
promisor
is
bound
I
perform the
one which
possible.
Costa V. Davis (1798)
Da
B.
Stevens v.
Webb (1835)
7 C.
242.
at p.
62.
299.
When
either of
two
alternatives
is
to be per- One
aiterna-
formed
j'^pg/Ji^'"^
comes impossible
a ques-
promisor
possible,
altogether discharged.
Barkwerth
v.
at p.
25.
300.
When
,
either of
.
two
,
alternatives
1
is
to be per>
Choice
impossible
formed
at
the promisor
or the promisee
option.
^-
Digitized
by Microsoft
132
LAW OF CONTRACT
and the promisor or the promisee chooses an alternative which afterwards becomes impossible, the promisor is in the same position as if he had originally
contracted to do the act, which he or the promisee
has elected.
Brown
v.
E.
&
E. 853.
Partial
imposstbtlity
301.
When
is
or
it is
whether the
and whether
entitles
him
how much
Menetonev. Athawes (1764) 3 Burr. 1592. Cutter V. Powell (1795) 6 T. R. 320. Gillett V. Mawman (1808) I Taunt. 140. Appleby V. Myres (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 651. Geipely. Smith (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 404. The Teutonia (1872) L. R. 4 P. C. 171. Leiston Gas Co. v. Leiston Council [1916] 2 K. B. 428.
Rights
^ac7tiire/
302.
The
dissolution of a contract
by subsequent
acquired under
it
by either of the
3 B.
parties.
826. Whincup V. Hughes (1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 78. Anglo- Egyptian. Co. v. .Renpie (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 271. Krellv. Henry [1903] 2 K. B. 740. Chandler v. Webster [1904] i K. B. (C. A.) 493.
S.
&
[In
Elliott
V.
affirmed by the
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
plied to the contrary,
133
inability to
mere
inability to
perform
f^^J"'"'
promise
is
this Title.
Thornborow
v.
Whitacre (1706)
(For the
a bond, see
effect of impossibility
relation to a condition of
Book
I,
114.)
many
war on the
effect of
important decisions pronounced during the war conditions upon pending contracts, the
statements in the text remain substantially correct {Blackburn Bohbin Co. v. Allen [191 8] 2 K. B. 467), though there has, inevitably, been a tendency to extend the doctrine of " frustration of adventure." One of the chief difHculties in applying this doctrine has been in deciding whether merely to suspend (F. A. Tamplin Co. v. AngloMexican Co. [1916] 2 A. C. 397), or to terminate {M. W. Board v. Dick, Kerr y Co. [191 8] A. C. 119), the currency of the contract.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Independent
promises
IV
RECIPROCAL
PROMISES
304.
ises,
When
a contract consists
of reciprocal promis,
according to
mere inde-
entitled to performance,
performed his
Ware
Jones
V.
v.
own promise
Kingston
Chappell (1649) Style, 1 86. v. Preston (1773) (per Lord Mansfield, C. J.), cited in Barkley (1781) z Dougl.,. at p. 689.
Conditional
305.
ises,
When
a contract consists
of reciprocal prom-
promises
party
a condition precedent
first
of performance by the
is
other, the
named
party
formance by the other unless he has himself performed or tendered performance in terms of the contract,
(1672)
Wms. Wms.
7
Hotham
Morton
Roberts
v. V.
Lamb (1797)
1 T. R. 638. T. R. 125.
'Christie v. Borelly
(i860) 7 C. B. N.
S.
561.
The
order
is
in
are
in
to
be
performed
determined by the
Court,
view
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
transaction.
Kingston
p.
v. Preston (1773), cited 689. Graves v. Legg (1854) 9 Exch.,
135
in Jones v. Barkley
(1781)
2
2 Dougl., at
at p.
716
(1857)
H. & N. 210.
XXXV
306.
When,
or both sides,
it is
him
to a corresponding part
performance or to entire
performance by the other, or whether complete performance on one side is a condition precedent of any
performance on the other.
Neale v. Ratcliff (1850) i; Q. B. 916. Wilson V. London Navigation Co. (1865) L. R.
1
C.
P. 61.
307. In a contract falling within 305, a party who has, by accepting substantial part performance,
jvaiver of
""'^""'"
insist
upon
of
a condition precedent
respect
of the
other
party's
failure
in
performance.
White V. Beeton (1861) 7 H. & N., at Behn v. Burness (1863) 3 B, & S. 751. Fust V. Dowie (1865) 5 B. & S. 37. Sale of Goods Act, 1893, s. 11, subs, i
p. 50.
(c),
F3
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Earnest
is
V EARNEST AND
upon the making of a
It
PENALTIES
something
308.
given
If,
contract,
as earnest, this is
of the contract.
LangfOft
may
Character
of earnest
payment upon
it
performance
{b)
to
fails
to
(c)
to
perform be returned,
it fails
to perform.
Howe
Kail
D.
102.
Deposit
pure aie
by
a purchaser
on
Soper V. Arnold (iSSg) L. R. 14 App. Ca., at p. 43 j. Levy V. Stogdon [1898] i Ch. 478.
Earnest as
311. If a person
who
money
amages
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
breach of contract, the earnest
is,
137
in the absence of
agreement
in estimating the
damages due
to the claimant.
at p.
Home
V.
105.
[There seems, however, to be some difference of opinion on this point in contracts for the sale of land {Griffiths v. Vesey [1906] i Ch. 796; Shuttleworth v. Clows [1910] i Ch. 176).]
312.
certain
When
sum
is
Penatty or
by
'/"^/l^^
sum
so agreed to be paid
is
to be regarded as a penI
1
alty or as liquidated
Davies
v.
damages (Book
1/)-
Penton (1827) 6 B. & C. 216. (1849) 7 C. B, 619. Law V. Redditch Local Board [1892] I Q. B., at p. 132. Public Works Commissioner v. Hills [1906] A. C. 368.
Sainter v. Ferguson
313. If in the view of the Court the sum in question is a penalty, the injured party cannot recover
Penalty not
""^"'''
sum
in ques-
Liquidated
re7,l^frabie
may
re-
cover such
sum
in full.
Kemble
v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
138
Language
immaterial
it is
LAW OF CONTRACT
sum
in
315. If the
question
is
in
law a penalty,
it
to
be payable
question
terial
is
damages
and
if
the
it is
it
sum in imma-
that
the
parties
have expressed
to be a
penalty.
KemUe
Sparrow
Parfitt V.
Paris (1862) 7" H. & N. 599. Chambre (1872) L. R. 15 Eq. 36. Cljdi Bank Engineering Co. v. Castaneda [1905] A. C.
v.
6.
Larger sum
on failure to
316. If
failure to
sum of money
is
agreed to be paid on
is
pay smaller
penalty.
Astley
V.
Wallis V. Smith
on
[This principle probably extends to agreements to pay money perform any obligation for the breach of which damages can be readily assessed; e. g., to supply goods or render, services of a kind readily obtainable in the open market. {Sloman v. Walter (1784) I Bro. C. C. 418; Zzt) v. Reddhch Local Board
failure to
[1892]
Q.
B. (C.
A)
127.)]
different
breaches
which any one is a promise to pay a certain sum of money, and a fixed sum is to be paid for the breach of any of them indifferently, this is a penalty.
Kemble
v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
done
is
is
139
Provision for
sum sum
^
^^*7/m/
val'
may be
damages.
Reynolds v. Bridge (1856) 6 E. & B., at p. 540. Wallis V. Smith (i88z) 21 Ch. D. 257.
Law
[But
or
if
V.
Q.
B. 127.
more matters of unascertained but trivial importance, and a large sum is to be paid in the event of any breach, quare whether this would not be treated by the Court as a penalty. {JVallis v.
Smith, ubi sup., at pp. 262-265.) I Q. B. 626 (C. A.).]
And
Provision
damages
to
cirUeothe7'
^'>neiies
specific
injunction
where
such
has
remedy
avail
appropriate.
But a
plaintiff
who
Macule (1842) 2 Dr. & W., at p. 284. Coles v. Sims (1854) 5 De G. M. & G. i. Jones V. Heavens (1877) 4 Ch. D. 636. Howard v. Woodward (1864) 34 L. J. Ch. 47. General Accident Assurance v. Noel\\^oz\ i K. B. 377.
whereby a man agrees to pay a sum of money or to do any other act on failure to
320.
contract
Penalty
,//^^"/,vy
in-
do an
void.
illegal act
is
Collins V. Blantern
Digitized
by Microsoft
140
Penalty for
LAW OF CONTRACT
A
contract (not being a bond) to pay a pen-
321.
alty,
non-performance of impossibility
or to
do any other
act, in
known
to both parties,
la^,
is
mere
voluntary
promise
If the contract is expressed in ( 203, 212, 213). the form of a bond, the provisions of Book' I 114,
apply.
Co.
Litt.
206
b.
114, ve^hen a
bond
is
performance
or non-
acts,
performance
may
be.
CI.
&
F. 611.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
IV
ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT
323. Subject to the provisions of 324 and 325, any right arising out of a contract may be
assigned.
Tolburst
V.
Contractual
''^f'^J-"^^,'
able
[1903] A.
C,
at p.
420.
[Even a contractual right to an indemnity may be assigned {British Union v. Rawson [1916] 2 Ch. 476).]
324.
.
mere
damages
Assignment
committed "
Magee [1902]
K. B.
at p.
433.
L. R. 58.]
[But
see
Weinberg
v.
XXII T.
is
325.
The
benefit of a contract
not assignable, if
Personal
contracts
be entitled thereto.
if
Such an intention
is
presumed,
personal
otherwise such
Griffith V.
B.
660;
[But, though a right to the performance of personal services is not assignable, the right to money due under a contract for personal services is (Crouch v.Jilartin (1707) 2 Vern. 595 ; Russell v. Austin Fryers (1907) T. L. R. 414).]
XXV
Digitized
by Microsoft
142
Notice
to
LAW OF CONTRACT
An
assignment of a right
is
326.
not complete
as
If,
promisor
before notice
is
communicated
he
is
not
Sorrell
15.
Priorities
him.
Morton, Down,
Co.
[1901] z K. B. 8zg.
Consideration
328.
A debtor
may
assignee on the
for
grpund that there is no consideration the assignment as between assignee and assignor.
Walker v. Bradford Old Bank (1884) 12 Q. B. D. 51 Harding v. Harding (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 442.
1.
Equities
329.
The
forward
against the
which
at
were
available to
Mangles
v.
him
Dixon (1852) 3 H. L. C. 735. Johnson (186,9) ^' ^ ^<!" S^Grouchy. Credit Fonder {iSy 3). L. R., 8 Q., B. 380. Roxiurghe v. Cox (1881) 17 Ch. D. 520.
Graham
v.
'-'
[Such defences- may include claims against the assignor which, though not actually enforceable at the date of the notice, arise out of transactions entered into between the as&ignor and the debtor
Digitized
by Microsoft
ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT
before that date.
there
143
have been an agreement between the assignor and the debtor that mutual credit should be given in respect of such transactions, or the claims must have arisen out of the coneither
tract the benefit of
must
which is assigned. {^Watson v. Mid-Wales Ry. Co. (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 593; Christie v. Taunton [1893] 2 Ch. 175 Govt, of Newfoundland v. Newfoundland Ry. Co. (1888) L. R. 13 App. Ca. 199.)]
330.
is
unassignable.
Contractual
duties not
Liversidge v. Broadbent (1859) 4 H. & N. 3Tolhurst V. Associated Cement Manufacturers [1902] z K. B. 660.
assignable
the
[The universality of this rule is unaffected by the judgment of House of Lords in Tolhurst's case. Nor is it affected by the
249
supra,'\
provisions of
331.
The
^.
,
Negotiable
instruments
to negotiable instruments.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION V
DISCHARGE OF CONTRACT
Modes of
discharge
'
may be
discharged in any of
:
'
[a)
{b)
[c)
{d)
By performance ( 333). By agreement ( 334-3S7)By condition subsequent ( 338).' By breach of condition or renunciation
;
;
{e)
By
Performance
333.
yj^hgn
Contract
is
discharged
by performance
equivalent to
and tender
under
is
performance.
Startup V. 'Macdonald (1843) 6
M. & G.
593.
Agreement
334.
contract
may be
discharged by a subsethat
it
quent
agreement of the
parties
shall
no
new
(1840) 7
M. & W.
55.
at p.
851. Thornhilly.-Neats (i860) 8- C. B. N. S. 831. Scarfs. Jar dine (1882) L, R. 7 App. Ca., at p. 351.
Fosters.
Digitized
by Microsoft
DISCHARGE OF CONTRACT
145
[Although the original contract was a specialty contract, performance of a simple contract, which professes to vary or discharge it, will be an answer to an action on the original contract. {Nash v. Jrmitrong (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 259; Steeds v. Steeds (1889) 22 Q. B. D. 537.) But quare whether the second contract is effectual as a discharge without performance?]
Oral
and a substituted
it fails
"^^""^'^
agreement which
is
unenforceable because
to
(1684)
Vern. 240.
& Ad. 65. Harney v. Grabham (1836) 5 A. & E., at pp. 73-74. Williams v. Moss Empires [1915] 3 K. B. 242. Morris v. Baron [1918] A. C. i.
Goss V. Lord Nugent (1833) 5 B.
336.
When
side,
Considera'""^
on one
is
ineffectual, unless it
under
seal
made
for a consideration.
Dawber (1851) 6 Exch. 839.
V.
Foster v.
Williams
337.
The
the Bills of
is
regulated by
Negotiable '"'"'"""'"-
ss.
338.
If
it is
Condition
^"^^"^"'"^
Digitized
by Microsoft
146
LAW OF CONTRACT
is
when such
time
has
elapsed
("Condition subsequent").
Now Ian
Ablett (1835) 2 C. M. & R. 54. Tattersall {\^j 1) L. R. 7 Ex. 7. Geipelv. Smith (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 404. Jackson V. Union Marine Insurance Co. (1874) L. R. lo C. P. I4'8.
v.
Heads,
Existing
The
"^^"
subsequent does not affect any right already enforceable under the contract
by either
party.
Anglo- Egyptian Co. v. Rennie (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 271. Chandler \. Webster [1904] i K. B. (C. A.) 493.
Future of
condition
339.
When
j
is
contract r
consists
of
r
reciprocal
i_
some perrormance by
II
one party
named
to
no; Book
(^)
fails so
perform or
cally expresses
disables himself
from performing,
is
other party
may
thereupon discharged.
v.
Ca. 434. {b) Freeth v. Burr (1874) L. R. 9 C. P. 208. Jvtmstonew. Milling (1886) 16 Q. B. D. 460. (f) Lovelock \. Franklyn (1846) 8 Q. B. 371.
Synge
v.
Synge.^\%<)i^
Q.
B. 466.
Digitized
by Microsoft
DISCHARGE OF CONTRACT
340. Even
either party
if
147
is
not a
Renunciation
may
it.
'
renounce
Freeth v. Burr, ubi sup. Mersey Steel Co. v. Naylor (1884) L. R. 9 App. Ca.,
at p.
438.
341.
If,
he continues
liable to
perform
the
his part,
and the
first-
named
party
may
claim
benefit
as
non-performance
which the other party may have acquired damages for breach of contract.
Frost V. Knight (1872) L. R. 7 Ex. 114.
claim
Johnstone v. Milling (1886) i6 Q. B. D. 460. Avery v. Bowden (1855) 5 E. & B. 714. Fusty. Dowie (1863) 32 L.J. Q. B. 179.
is
character of
stipulations
or
a promise, the
breach of which
injured
;
may
at the
as
option of the
party be
treated
having that
{c)
effect
or
claim for
Digitized
by Microsoft
148
is
LAW OF CONTRACT
be decided by the
M. & G.
a question to
Court on the
Gkholm
Simpson
V. v.
Hays (1841) z
257.
Bettiniw. Gye (1876) i Q. B. D. 183. Mersey Steel & Iron Co. w.Naylor (1884) L. R. 9 App. Ca. 434.
-
Delay
in
343.
When
in a contract a time
act,
is
performance
performance of an
there
not of the
(Book
115), then, if
delay in J)erformance on
Hmit
'
a reasonable
failure to
tract as discharged.
What
\ \
is
time
is
a question
of fact in
each
case.
Taylor v.
Brown (1839)
Parkin Hatten
v.
v.
z Beav. 180. Thorold {\%t,z) 16 Beav. 59. Russell (1888) 38 Ch. D. 334.
Operation
"J
344.
Contract
may be
discharged by operation
:
"'
( 347).
Merger
345.
tract
is
An
discharged by merger,
when an
identical
Digitized
by Microsoft
DISCHARGE OF CONTRACT
obligation
specialty.
Higgens^ Case (1605) 6 Rep. 45 b. Holmes v. Bell (1841) 3 M. & G. 213. Sellw. Banks (1841) 3 M. & G, 258.
is
149
Owen
V.
Homan (1851)
Mac.
& G.
J.
378. C. P. 102.
346.
The making
Bankruptcy
on
a contract,
to
resort
to
19 14.
Except
claims provided
for
by
and 30 (subs, i) of that Act, the discharge of the bankrupt destroys the creditor's right
28
(subs, i)
28
(2).
347.
Any
Alteration
'document
promin-
strument
&
C. 428.
Cooper (1844) 13 M. & W. 343. Aldotts V. Cornwell\\%b%) L. R. 3 Q. B. 573. Pattinson v. Luckley (1875) L. R. 10 Ex. 330. Prince v. The Oriental Bank (1878) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 325.
Davidson
v.
Suffell V.
Q.
B.
D. 270; 9 Q. B. D.
(C.A.)S55.
[For a modification
the case of negotiable instruments, see Bills of
64.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
VI
may
{b)
(f)
(d) [e)
-
By release; ( 349) By accord and satisfaction ( 350, 351) By payment in satisfaction ( 352) By judgment; (353) By operation of the Statutes of Limitation.
;
;
( 354)
Release
349.
document under
seal,
whereby
a party en-
titled to sue
of action ("Release").
Barker
Harris
v. St.
v.
at p.
453.
Accord and
satisfaction
.350.
of contract
may
some
When
such
act has
been
and per-
Digitized
by Microsoft
151
formance discharge the right of action (" Accord and Satisfaction ")
Bayley
v. V.
Smith
Day
V.
Homan (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 920. Trowsdale (1854) 3 E. & B. 83. McLea (1889) 22 Q. B. D. (C. A.) 610,
Accord
JJlijf"^^iig
discharge
of the
Evans
Rhodes (1836) i M. & W. 153. Powis (1847) i Exch. 601. Henderson v. Stobart (1850) 5 Exch. 99. Hallv. Flockton (1851) 16 Q. B. 1039. Gabriel \. Dresser (1855) i 5 C. B. 622.
v.
liable,
not being
352.
is is
right
of action
on
liquidated
claim
Payment
discharged
in
law
Ash
Satisfaction ").
V.
Fouppeville
V.
TetUy
Digitized
by Microsoft
152
Payment of
LAW OF CONTRACT
in coin
of the realm of a
lesser
.sum, in satisfaction of a debt accrued due, only discharges the debt pro tanto.
Foakes
v> Beer (1884) L. R. 9 App. Ca. 605. Underwood v. Underwood [ 1 894] P. Z04.
Judgment
353.
discharged
when judgment
is
is
in
Hammond
V.
Schofield
Lapse of ""^
354.
of contract
(Bk.
I Sect.
may be
V).
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
VII
When two
or
more
persons contract as
prom-
Co-promisors
in respect
contract as:
{a)
joint
or
[b)
(c)
several; or
promisors.
as
joint
promisors
when
joint
P'''""""''
"
The
said
A and B
357. Persons contract as several promisors when they enter into independent promises for the same
performance.
Ward
[e. g.
V.
Several
\romisors P'"""
"'
and B, each for himself, his executors promise, and agree."] do hereby covenant,
said
" The
etc.,
Digitized
by Microsoft
154
Joint and
several
LAW OF CONTRACT
Persons contract as joint and several promunite in
into
358.
isors
promison
when they
also enter
and
independent
same performance.
Ex parte Harding (1879)
Burns
v.
" The said A and B for themselves do hereby covenant, [e. g. and each of them for himself doth covenant."]
Liability of
359.
When
for
co-promisors
promisors
as as
whole performance promised, unless the contrary appears from the terms of the contract.
Richards
King
Tyser
V.
V.
v. Heather (18 17) i B. & Aid., at p. 35. Hoare (1844) 13 M. & W., at p. 505. The Shipowners' Syndicate [1896] I Q. B. 35-
Discharge of
co-promisors
360. If
One co-promisor
satisfied
has
fully
performed
lia-
^^^ promise, or
bility
co-promisor or
co-promisors
discharged.
p. 500.
King V. Hoare ( 1 844) 13 M. & W. 494. Beaumont v. Greathead (1846) 2 C. B., at Thome v. Smith (1851) 10 C. B. 659.
Judgment
promisor""'
361.
judgment
discharges
recovered
the
against
to
one joint
creditor
promisor
of'
liability
the
the
Digitized
by Microsoft
155
and
several, promisors.
362.
joint, or joint
and
Release of
promisors.
North V. Wakefield {li^i^ 13 Q. B., at p. 541. Mercantile Bank v. Taylor [1893] A. C. 317. In re E. W. A. [1901] 2 K. B. 642.
363.
When judgment
Execution
^f.^'^J^/^^^^
upon any one of them for the whole amount of the judgment debt. Wm. Bl. 388. Birdv. Randall {1762)
co-promisors, execution
i
may be
Land Credit
Co. v. Fermoy
(1870) L. R.
liability Survival of
''""'
'"*"">
Upon
the death of a
last
20 Eq. 585.
Re Hodgson (1885)
White
V.
Digitized
by Microsoft
156
Contribution
LAW OF CONTRACT
promisors, has
suffered
and
satisfied
judgment upon
he
is
presump-
Underbill
Prior V.
Q. B. 75,
Insolvency
is is
increased proportionately,
Hitchtnan
v.
Stewart (1855)
Dr. 271.
B.
D. 455.
at p.
80.
or of equal contribution
g. in the case
Co-promisees
367.
When
:
tw^o
or
more
persons
contract
as
may
contract as
;
{a) joint
(/5)
or
several,
promisees.
They cannot
(1588)
5
contract
as
joint
and
several promisees,
Slingsby's Case
Rep. 18
i
b.
Bradburney. Botfteld
Digitized
by Microsoft
157
as
joint
promisees
or
as
several promisees,
a question
of construction for
368.
When
respect of the
Lj^l'^g,
performance
collectively
to
and
must
all
be parties
n.
(i).
all
be joined as parties
11
plaintiff.
.{Luke
v. South
Cullen v.
Knowles
dies,
""M joint
"^
promisee
and the
Payment
one joint '"'j"'"'
to
promisee
W.
Z64.
164.
at p.
Digitized
by Microsoft
158
LAW OF ^CONTRACT
[This is the Common Law rule; and there is nothing inconwith it in Steeds v. Steeds {zz Q. B. D. 537), which merely recognises the rule that, in case of doubt, equity presunies against a joint loan. If upon the true construction of the contract the creditors are found to be jointly interested, the Common Law rule still applies (per Farwell J., in Powell v. Brodhurst [igoi] 2 Ch.,
sistent
at p. 1
known by
64) unless (perhaps) the person to whom the money the debtor to be one of co-trustees.]
is
paid
is
Release by
one joint
promisee
by one joint promisee discharges the promisor from his liability to the other or
371.
release
others,
unless
it
was given
in
known
to the debtor to
-;'i
f-R
Digitized
by Microsoft
NOTE TO BOOK
The
(Book
II,
PART
II
Part
I),
so
far
as
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
BOOK
Part
II
^
j
^^^1
^^^
,,,
OBLIGATIONS
II
i,,^,,,,,,^
^ni
h>
SALE
^looii
'
''
:;
"'''.,'"
^'
"'^^'.'^.^^
ss.
to
?.mm}W
TITLE
372.
SALE
OF GOODS
is
a contract
Definition
""
buyer,"
price."
raoney
There may be
Sale of
of
sale
between
I.
this Title
^'""^^
chattels
things in
The term
includes emblements
tached to
which
are
of
sale.
Sale of
g^g
-J
s.
62.
.
'/nJnoj
']
G2
/(J
Digitized
by Microsoft
62
LAW OF CONTRACT
The
goods! which form the subject
Existing or
374.
of
contract of sale
may be
of the contract of
Sale of
goods").
s.
Goods Act,
1893,,
5.
(i)
Sale over
^^
222 (Book
Sale of
II,
Part
I)
s.
apply.
4. (i)
Non-existent
^'^
'
is
a contract
ledge of the
have perished
at the
is
6.
knowtime when
the contract
void.
Goods Act,
893,
s.
Risk of loss
377.
Where
there
is
an agreement to
sell
specific
before the
is
thereby avoided.
,
1893,5,
7.
Price
378.
The
may be
fixed
be fixed in man-
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
ner thereby agreed, or
course of dealing between the parties.
price
is
163
the
the
not determined in accordance with the foregoing provisions, the buyer must pay a reasonable
price.
fact in
What
each
is
a reasonable price
is
a question of
case.
Sale of
s.
8.
379. Where there is an agreement to sell goods on the terms that the price is to be fixed by the valuation of a third pa^ty, and such third party does
not or cannot
is
Sale at a
make such
if
to,
valuation, the
agreement
avoided
but
he
must
pay
a reasonable
is
Where such
third party
buyer, the
may maintain
Goods Act, 1893,
9.
380.
Where
a contract
of sale
is
subject to any
Conditional
seller,
the buyer
may
waive the condition, or may elect to treat the breach of such condition as a breach of warranty, and not
as a
as
repudiated.
sale
is
Whether
stipulation
in a contract
of
condition, the
breach
of which
may
give rise to
Digitized
by Microsoft
64
LAW OF CONTRACT
war-
rise to a
claim
goods
and
case
depends in each
A
a
stipu-
lation
may be
a condition,
though called
a contract
warranty
is
in the contract.
Where
of sale
not
severable,
where the contract is for goods, the property in which has passed
part thereof, or
to
the
by the
seller
as
breach of
the
warranty, and
ground
for
rejecting
as repudiated, unless
11 (i).
I,
[For conditions and warranties see further, Book and Book II, Part I, 305-3071 339-3
109-120,
Implied
'^^""
381. In a contract of
sale,
unless
the
circuma differ-
is
show
part
sale,
an
implied
condition
on
the
of
the
a
seller
that, in
sell
the case of a
he has
right to
/
of an agreement to
to
sell
the
is
goods
to pass
at
property
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
(2) an
165
implied
warranty
enjoy
that
the
buyer
of
shall
have
and
quiet
possession
the
goods
(3)
from any charge or encumbrance in favour of any third party, not declared or
free
or at the time
s.
iz.
382.
Where
there
is
Sale by de"^''/"*"
(subject
to
411) an correspond
as
and
it is
if the sale
be by sample,
well as by description,
goods do not
also
Sale of
13.
this Title
and of
Q,uaiity
and
any statute
is
^^""'
of
sale,
except
follows
(i)
Where
makes known to the seller the particular purpose for which the goods are required, so as to show that the buyer relies on the
seller's skill or
Digitized
by Microsoft
i66
LAW OF CONTRACT
of
a description
seller's
which
it
is
in the course of
the
business to supply
(whether he
there
is
be the
manufacturer or not),
for such purpose.
an
be
goods
shall
But, in the
under
is
its
there
for
(2)
no implied condition
;
Where goods
a seller
whq
is
deals in
tion
(whether he be
manufacturer
or
not), there
But
no implied condition
such
;
as
regards
defects
to
which
revealed
(3)
examination
ought
have
An
may be
does
an-
An
express warranty or
condition
not
negative a warranty
^
or condition implied by
s.
14.
Sale by
384.
Contract of sale
is
is
by
sample
term
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
for
sale
167
by sample, the
:
implied, viz.
[a)
following
conditions
are
That
That
the
in
bulk
shall
correspond
with the
reasonable
sample
((^)
quality
the
buyer
shall,
have
sample
(c)
That the goods shall be free. from any defect, rendering them unmerchantable, which would
not be apparent on reasonable examination
of the sample.
Sale of
s.
15.
385.
It
is
Duties of
""
^'^^^^
s.
27.
Risk
the
is
trans-
but
when
transferred
to
made
or not.
But where delivery has been delayed through the fault of either buyer or seller, the goods are at the
risk
of the party in
fault as regards
any
loss
which Nothof
affects
the
duties
or
liabilities
G3
Digitized
by Microsoft
68
LAW OF CONTRACT
other party.
Sale of
s.
zo.
Delivery and
387. UnlesS
Otherwise
agreed,
delivery
of
the
paymtn
that
is
exchange
s.
28.
Delivery
388. Whether
it is
them
to
the buyer,
is
a question
the
seller's
place of business,
;
if not,
his residence
sale
except
be for the
of specific goods,
which, to the knowledge of the parties when the contract is made, are in some other place, then that
place
(a)
is
But
Where
is
bound to send the goods to the buyer, and no time for sending them is fixed, the seller is bound to send them within a reasonable
time
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
(b)
169
Where
no
his behalf;
Demand
as
or tender of delivery
may be
a
treated
ineffectual
made
at
reasonable
is
hour.
What
a reasonable
hour
a ques-
tion of fact
(d)
This
is
is
the
of
"
meant.]
s.
29,
389.
Where
the
seller
delivers
to
the buyer a
sell,
Mis-deiwery
quantity of goods
less
than he contracted to
the
But
if
them
at
the
Where
may
the buyer
he
may
If the
Where
he contracted
a different
Digitized
by Microsoft
170
LAW OF CONTRACT
accept the goods which are in accordance with
rest,
may
or he
may
reject the
The
of trade, special
between the
parties.
Sale of
A
Delivery by
instalments
-^
s.
30.
'
ments.
Where
there
is
a contract for
deliveries in respect
which are to be and the seller makes defective of one or more instalments, or
it is
a question in
whether the
of the whole breach giving
a repudiation
is
whether
it
a severable
to treat the
whole contract
as
repudiated.
s.
31.
Delivery
(arrter
to
sale,
^^
seller is
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
to
171
the buyer,
delivery
prim(^ facie
deemed
But
carrier
must make such contract with the on behalf of the buyer as may be
pf the
do,
If
the
seller
omit
so
to
and
the buyer
may
the
himin
or
may hold
;
seller
responsible
damages
{j})
by the
seller
to
the
volving sea
transit,
under circumstances in
which
it
is
may
enable
him
to insure
them during
fails to
do
deemed
transit.
to
be
at
his
risk
Sale of
s.
32.
Where the seller of goods agrees to deliver them at his own risk at a place other than that where they are when sold, the buyer must, never392.
Distant
^'^''^
Digitized
by Microsoft
172
thele^s,
LAW OF CONTRACT
unless
deterioration' in
incident to
s.
33.
Examination
393.
Where goods
are delivered
to
the buyer,
^'"' ^
which he has not previously examined, he is not deemed tb havfe accepted them, unless and until he has had a reasonable opportunity of examining them
for the piurpose
And
unless other-
when
a
the
seller
is
tenders delivery of
bound, on request, to
the
buyer
s,
34.
Acceptance
394.
'J'he
buyer
is
deemed
to
of goods
gopdjS vyhpn
he intimates to the
he has
accepted them, or
when
them which
the
seller,
is
or
when,
of a reasonable
that
Goods Act,
893,
s.
35.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
173
Rejection of
^
is
them
to the seller.
It
is
sufficient if
he intimates
them.
he refuses
to accept
s.
Sale of
36.
396.
When
the seller
is
ready and
willing
to
Failure to
^^/^^'
deliver the
delivery,
time
after
he
is
and
also for
goods.
The
to
additional
and independent of
where
amounts
s.
37.
[Presumably this section of the Act only refers to a buyer improperly refuses or neglects to accept deliveiy.]
who
deemed to be an "unpaid seller" within the meaning of this Title la) When the whole of the price has not been
397.
The
seller
of goods
is
Unpaid
"^''^''
paid or tendered
ib)
When
a bill of
conditional
Digitized
by Microsoft
174
LAW OF CONTRACT
paymentj and the condition on which
it
was
In son who
in the position
seller to
of
an agent of the
whom
the
bill
of lading has
who
has him-
Remedies of
mpat
se
er
notwithstanding that
passed to the
may have
implication of law
(a) a lien
[i.e.
on the goods
t|he
for
price,
while he
in
possession of
them
(J))
of the buyer,
a right
them
Where
lien
and
ofGoods'Act, 1893,
s.
39,
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
unpaid
is
175
Lien
of goods
who
is
in possession of
them
entitled to retain
possession
[a)
Where
Where
stipulation as to credit;
{b^
Where the buyer becomes insolvent. The seller may exercise his right of lien,
[c)
notwith-
standing that he
is
in
possession of the
goods
as
s.
41.
400.
livery
Where an unpaid seller has made part deof the goods, he may exercise his right of lien
Part
'^'^'^
de-
on the remainder, unless such part delivery has been made under such circumstances as to show an agree-
ment
s.
42.
thereon
[a)
401.
The unpaid
he
seller
of goods
loses
his
lien
Loss of Hen
When
Digitized
by Microsoft
176
(/^)
LAW OF CONTRACT
When
the buyer or his agent lawfully obtains
;
a lien thereon,
s.
43.
Stofpage in
this Title,
when
who
to say,
as
long
them
until
payment
Sale of
Duration of
tramit
transit
to a carrier
purpose of
an end.
the arrival of the goods at the appointed
acknowledges
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
to the buyer, or his agent, that
177
on
his behalf,
an end
and
it
is
immaterial that
a further destina-
may have
buyer.
If the goods are
carrier
or
them, the
if
not deemed to be
at
an end, even
back.
them
When
a ship chartered
by
the buyer,
a question
in
as a carrier, or as
agent
Where
refuses
the
carrier
or
other
bailee
w^rongfuUy
to
deliver
deemed
to be at
an end.
Where
made
circumstances
as
to show^
an agreement to give up
possession of the
Sale of
45.
404.
stoppage
The
unpaid
A
seller
may
\
Process of stoppage
tn transitu, either
Digitized
by Microsoft
178
LAW OF CONTRACT
by giving notice of
bailee in
his claim
whose
possession
must be given
diligence,
may communicate
it
to his
servant or agent in
the buyer.
When
is
to, or
of,
the
seller.
The
ex-
Sale of
893,
s.
46.
Transfer of
rights
unpaid
seller's
is
But, where a
who
takes
such
last-
mentioned
transfer
was by way of
sale,
the unpaid
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
seller's
179
is
right of lien
or stoppage in transitu
de-
feated,
and
if
way of pledge
unpaid
seller's
the
s.
47.*
Resale
by an
in
unpaid
transitu.
stoppage
{a)
But
of his
right
of lien or
Where
an unpaid
seller
who
title
Where
or
gives notice to
re-sell,
and the
may
nal buyer
damages
for
any
loss
occasioned
by
(c)
his
breach of contract
the seller expressly reserves a right of
Where
buyer should
make
is
default,
making
thereby
Digitized
by Microsoft
i8o
LAW OF CONTRACT
rescinded; but without prejudice to any claim
the seller
may have
for damages.
s.
Sale of
48.
Action for
price
sale,
the property
may
the
him
goods
price
livery,
is
may
maintain an action
goods
has not passed, and the goods have not been appropriated to the contract.
Sale of
s.
49.
Action for
non-accep-
408.
Where
the
buyer
wrongfully neglects or
tance
may
him
for
damages
for non-acceptance.
The measure
rectly
of damages
is
and naturally
there
Where
to
is
in question, the
measure of damages
prima facie
the
tract price
at
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
time or times when
then
the.
i8i
Sale of
s.
50.
409.
Where
Remedies of
2c7ion for
non-delivery
_
may maintain
for non-delivery.
The
rectly
measure of damages
is
the estimated
loss di-
and naturally
there
breach of contract.
Where
is
damages
is
prima facie
to
goods
at the
when
been delivered,
no time was
deliver.
s.
51.
410.
seller,
Where
there
is
Breach of
^"^''""'y
or
compelled, to
treat
seller
any breach of a condition on the part of the as a breach of" warranty, the buyer is not, by
goods
but he
may
up against the
seller
in
or
Digitized
by Microsoft
l82
[S^
LAW OF CONTRACT
maintain an action against the
seller for
dam-
The measure
is
warranty.
prima fade the difference between the value of the goods at the time of delivery to the buyer,
is
if
they had
The
buyer has
set
up the breach of
action
he has suffered
further damage.
Goods Act, 1893,
s.
53.
Special
411.
arise
it
Where any
would
agreement
by usage,
to the contract.
Sale of
s.
55.
Sales hy
sale
of goods by auction
auction
Where goods
in lots,
are put
is
up for
sale
by auction
each lot
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF GOODS
((^)
183
sale
by
auction
is
complete
its
when
the
auctioneer announces
fall
completion by the
manner.
any bidder
(c)
made
may
Where
seller,
a sale
by auction
not lawful
not notified to be
on behalf of the
is
employ any person to bid, at such sale, or for the auctioneer knowingly to take any bid from the seller or any such perhimself, or to
son.
Any
sale
as
may
be treated
.
[d)
sale
and
a right to bid
may
Where
behalf,
also
half of the
a right to bid
expressly
reserved, but
his
seller, or
may
s.
58.
413.
tracts
The
sale
Sale by
"-^
way
''
of
do not apply
to
'"""
form of a contract of sale which is intended to operate by way of mortgage, pledge, charge, or other
security.
Sale of
Goods
Actjt
1893,
s.
61 (4).
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Definition
II
SALE
of
sale
OF LAND
of land
is
414.
contract
a contract
to trans-
Statute of
415.
satisfy
Frauds
No
Part
I) is
enforceable by action.
Statute of
Frauds (1677)
s.
4,
Price
may
fix a
price
[b)
provide
for
the
price
to
be ascertained in
354.
When
is
the price
is
to
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF LAND
certained in the
185
way
prescribed.
Upon such
ascer-
App. Ca.,
at p.
920.
What
is
a fair price
is
41 7.
Where
there
is
a contract to sell
is
land on PrUe u
^'^^
be
to be fixed
by the valu-
make such
[Where
is
avoided.
prevented from malcing the valuation by the fault of the vendor or purchaser, the party not in fault may (probably) maintain an action for damages against the party in fault. At least, in Smith v. Peters (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 511, Sir G. Jessel, M. R., granted a mandatory order to compel the vendor to
the third
party
is
418.
may
open''
terms agreed upon by the parties which are not If the parties have merely agreed contrary to law.
to sell and purchase without expressing the terms
contract
sale
is
open contract
419. In every contract of sale of land, in the absence of agreement to the contrary, there are an
Good
title
Digitized
by Microsoft
86
LAW OF CONTRACT
II,
Part-
I,
342) that the vendor will make a good the property contracted to be sold.
Ogihie
V.
title to
Doe
d.
Gray
Stanion (1836)
M. & W.,
at p.
701.
Ellis V.
Disclosure
of defects
420. In the absence of agreement to the contrary, ^ J a vendor must disclose to a purchaser any material de.
within his
Ch. 335.
liability
Construction
it is
_ _
(in the
of contract
he
legally
Boioer
V.
competent to convey
Cooper (1842) 2 Ha. 408.
(b)
to
*
convey
Hughes
V.
a freehold estate
{\%\o) 4 Y. & Parker (1841) 8 M.
of fee simple;
C, at & W.
p.
Cattell V. Corrall
236.
244.
(f )
to
Gatayes v. Flather (1865) 34 Beav. 387. Ogihie_ V. Foljambe (1817) 3 Mer., at p. 65. Re Bettesworth isf Richer (1883) 37 Ch. D. 535.
Digitized
by Microsoft
187
agreement
negativing
Cox
Caio
when
at p.
circumstances
them
V.
are
known
to the purchaser.
216.
V.
Gloag' s
.
Ellis V.
Thompson ( 1882) 9 Q. B. D. 616. and Miller' s Contract (1883) 23 Ch. D. 320. Rogers (1885) 29 Ch. D., at p. 666.
sale
of land
it is
prima
to
Subject-
fade implied
sold
that
the
interest
contracted
be
[a) carries
with
it
and
enjoyment
529.
7'attersall
{iS^})
Sm.
& G.
Denne
v.
Light (1857) 8
De G. M. & G.
774.
[At least in the absence of such incidents of ownership the Court will not compel specific performance. " To do so would be to compel the purchaser to pay for what he would not have the means of enjoying." {Denne v. Light, at p. 784.) The cases cited are silent as to the effect of such a contract at Common Law.]
(6)
ad
inferos.
Pope V. Garland (1841) 4 Y. & C, at p. 403. Sparrow v. Oxford (1852) 2 De G. M. & G., at Bellamy v. Debenham [1891] i Ch. 412. Laybourn v. Gridley [1892] 2 Ch. 53. Haden's Contract [1905] i Ch. 603 Jackson's
p.
110.
[1906]
Ch. 412.
[On
excluded, these
being
usually
But a contract of
sale
Digitized
by Microsoft
88
LAW OF -CONTRACT
^
*^
1845,
undertakers
under
the
Waterworks
be necessary
may
the purchase.
s.
77.
s.
1
847,
8.
Duties of
{a\
a
;
good
title to
the property
agreed to be sold
[See
Addendum
to this Title.]
[b\
upon
payment or tender of the purchase money and interest, if any, and all outgoings and expenses, if any, properly payable by the purchaser, to execute, and procure the execution by
of, a
all
(if
any)
835.
at p.
(1S04) 2 Sch. & L., at p. 166. Raynerx. Preston (1881) 18 Ch. D. per Brett L. J.,
Costigan v. Hastier
11.
(c)
as aforesaid, to
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF LAND
[d)
189
to the pur-
upon completion,
chaser
all
to
hand over
in
title
deeds
the possession or
as
relate
to
other
property
retained
by
the
vendor
Bryant v. Busk (1827) 4 Russ. i. Duthy's and Jesson' s Contract [1898] I Ch. 419. Conveyancing Act, 1881, s. 9. (^Quare, can a trustee-vendor be called upon to give more than an acknowledgment ?) [In respect of the
latter, a
(*)
and
(b)
Lysaght v. Edwards (1876) z Ch. D., at p. 507. Clarke v. Ramuz [1891] 2 Q. B. 456. Carrodus v. Sharp (1855) 20 Beav. 56. Barsht V. Tagg [1900] i Ch., at p. 234.
[f) in or concurrently with the conveyance to enter into proper covenants for title and any
other usual covenants.
Earl Poulett
Blakeney
v.
Hood (1868) L. R. 5 Eq. 115. 1 De G. & Sm., at p. 345 Hardie (1874) I. R. 8 Eq., at 390.
v.
;
[Express covenants for title are not now inserted the Conveyancing Act, 1881, s. 7, having provided that such covenants shall be implied from the use of appropriate words in the deed of conveyance, e.g. in a conveyance for valuable consideration from the use
Duties of
^"''' "'^^
Digitized
by Microsoft
I90
[a'j
LAW OF CONTRACT
within a reasonable time after proof of the
vendor's
title,
it
to prepare a proper
to the
conveyance
;
and tender
Feo/e V. /////(1840) 6
(/^)
upon the execution of the conveyance by the vendor and all other necessary parties, to pay
to the persons entitled the purchase
money
and interest
(if
any)
[Formerly, where the vendor was' a trustee for third parties, it was generally the duty of a purchaser to see that the money paid by him was duly applied for the benefit of the beneficiaries under the trust. But now, by s. 20 of the Trustee Act, 1893 (amplifying
in
writing of a trustee
several
trustees, all
is
sufficient
When
there
are
must
concur in giving receipts {In re Flower (1884) 27 Ch. D. 592). Similar provisions as to the receipts of trustees under the Settled Land Acts are contained in the Settled Land Act, 1882, s.
Purchasers from mortgagees, even where there was a joint account clause, were formerly bound to satisfy themselves that the joint tenancy had not been severed. This is now rendered in most cases unnecessary by the Conveyancing Act, 1881, ss. 22 & 61. Formerly purchasers from an heir or beneficial devisee, when "the land was charged with debts or legacies, were bound to see to the application of the purchase money. This is now rendered in most cases unnecessary by the Land Transfer Act, 1897, which makes realty (other than legal interests in copyholds) devolve in the first instance upon the personal' representatives, who have the same powers, rights, duties, and liabilities with regard to it as in the case of chattels real.]
40.
(c)
upon completion,
property so
to
take
possession
of the
all
;
as to relieve
1396.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF LAND
(<^)
191
to
ance of future
erty,
the prop-
when
the
vendor
remains liable in
respect thereof;
[, g. the purchaser of a lease is bound to covenant to pay the rent and pefform the covenants, and indemnify the vendor
upon them. (^Pember v. Mathers (1779) i Bro. So a purchaser of freeholds subject to restrictive covenants. (^Moxhay v. Inderwick (1847) 1 De G. & S. 708; Poole's 5f Clarke's Contract [1904] 2 Ch. 173).]
against liability
C. C. 52).
(e) if
he
or to
make
requisitions or objections, to do
of a complete abstract of
Seton V.
title.
Skde (1802)
7 Ves. Z78.
425.
A
.
purchaser
Circumstances)
XII bound
is
Disclosure by
any
r lact
if
purchaser
knowh
to
to
Walters v. Morgan {i%6i) 3 De G. F. & J. 718. Coaksw. Boswell (1S86) L. R. 11 App. Ca., at p. 235.
426.
The
loss
resulting
in- Rjsi of
''''"'''"'"""
of the contract
Lysaght
v.
falls
Poole V. Shergold
Rayner
v.
Edwards (1876) z Ch. D., at p. 507. (1786) z Bro. C. C. 118. Preston (1881) 18 Ch. D. i.
[In the absence of 'special agreement, the ivendor is not bound to keep up existing insurances on the property for the benefit of the
Digitized
by Microsoft
19?
purch^isei;;
LAW^OF CONTRACT
nor,
is
he a trustee for the purchaser of moneys recovered {Rayner v. 'Preston^ iib't sup.) If the insurer has paid money to the vendor in respect of a loss occurring
of the contract, he
may
v.
amount
Spooner [1905] 2 K. B. 753.) And a purchaser can usually protect him'sdif, in the case of losses by fire, by requiring the insurers to reinstate the buildings under the Fires Prevention Act, 1774. (Re Quiche's Trusts [1908] I Ch. 887.)]
,,,,
{Phanix Co.
(of
-.VMV
Saks by
427.
lars
When
land
is
sold
is
reserved.
without
not
the
reserve'^ or
such person.
'
V.
U
bid
i,
j3qj; to
Sale of
s.
5.
Right
to
428.
Where any
of land
is
de-
of such
seller to bid,
as
proper.
,
fj'fn'jii
^^^
s.
Contracts of
tenancy
'429.
Any
contract
fr
to
/-
/-
other for a
money
consideration
is
governed by the
of land, so far
as
Digitized
by Microsoft
SALE OF LAND
430.
193
mean-
Mortgages
Addendum
It
is
this
work
this^
to enter
upon a discussion
of
(
title
Without doing
423 () ), that the vendor must show and make a good title to the property to be sold, may be amplified as follows. The vendor
must
(i)
show a good title, i. e. at his own expense deliver to the purchaser an " abstract " (i. e. a summary of documents and events) showing a sufficient right to convey (^Soutef v. Drake (1834) 5 B. & Ad. 995 ; Doe d. Gray v. Stanton (1836) I M. & W., at p. 701). By a "good title" is meant a title deduced from the legal period of commencement, and complete in all other respects. It is sufficient to show a good equitable title, with the power to get in the legal estate by the time appointed for completion {Camberwell V. HoUoway (1879) 13 Ch. D., at p. 763). " (2) make a good title, i. e. at his own expense verify his " abstract by producing all the abstracted documents in his possession, and procuring, at the purchaser's expense, the production of all such documents as are not in his possession, and supply'
other evidence necessary to establish the title shown Incidentally, the vendor must duly answer and comply with all proper requisitions on title made by the
ing
all
in the abstract.
purchaser.
With
(i)
commencement of
title,
the
following rules
may be
noted.
(2)
purchaser may generally claim to have the title traced back over a period of forty years next before the date of the contract (Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, s. i). In the absence of stipulation to the contrary, the purchaser of a term of years may not call for the title to the freehold
(ib. s.
2.)
(3)
The
the right (unless expressly reserved) to call for the to the leasehold reversion (Conveyancing Act, 1881,
(0(9))-
H2
Digitized
by Microsoft
194
.
LAW OF CONTRACT
The
purchaser of an intel'est in land converted by enfranchisement from copyhold or customary tenure into freehold has not the right (extept by agreement) to call for the title to make the enfranchisement (/^. s. 3 (2) (9) ). purchaser in every case
root of title,"
i. e.
(4)
may require the vendor to go back " to some instrument of disposition dealing" with, or proving on the face of it (without the aid of extrinsic evidence), the ownership of thc' whole legal and equitable estate in the property Sold, containing a description by which the property can be identified, and showing nothing to cast, any doubt on the title of the disposing parties." (Williams, Vendor and
to
The
" a good
Purchaser^ Vol.
I. p.
87)].
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
HIRE
431.
II
contract of hire
is
a contract
whereby one
Definition
able consideration.
to land.
The
432.
When
the contract
is
is
Defects
^^^^^^"
cific thing,
the letter
the duty of
and proper for the purpose for which, to the knowledge of the letter, it was intended to be used,
fit
as care
(a)
and
skill
can
make
Co.
it.W
(1881)
7
Robertson
v.
Amazon Tug
Q.
B.
D. 598.
case.)
(See
judgment of Bramwell, L. J., in this (b) Hyman v. Nye (1881) 6 Q. B. D. 685. (But see Vogan 3" Cit. v. Oulton (1898) 79 L. T. 384.)
however
the dissenting
433. If an animal
is
it
Keep of ani"'"l^
prima facie
j^
falls
r- 1
on the
^l-
hired
& &
Bing., at p. 360.
Rob. 234.
Digitized
by Microsoft
196
Duties of
"^^'^
LAW OF CONTRACT
the duty of the hirer
:
{a) to
such care
as a
man may be
own
(a)
(b)
Dean
v. Collins [1904] I K. B. 6z8. Keate (1811) 3 Camp. 4. Batson v. Donovan (1820) 4 B. & Aid., at p. 30. v.
(b) to
(c) to
where no time
is
requiring
him
to
do
so
at p.
916.
which
was received,
this
fair
wear and
arise
lost,
tear excepted.
if
But
the thing
or has deterio-
hirer
Cooper V. Barton (1810) 3
Camp.
(n.)
\e)
to
Digitized
by Microsoft
HIRE
trary, the offspring
197
Offspring
435. In the absence of agreement to the conof a female animal hired, born
belongs to the owner of the
during
animal,
the
hiring,
statement
but
it
believed that
it
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
LOAN
III
436.
is
a contract
Promise of
loan
437.
unless
it
A
is
promise to lend
goods
is
not
binding
under
seal.
(See
&
[This follows from the general rule of English Law. 213, Book II, Part I.)]
203
Latent defects
the
the
likely to render
perilous to
which the
If the
knows
that
the
loan
is
accepted.
MacCarthy
& Exeter Ry. Co. (1858) Toung (1861) 6 H. & N. 329. Coughlinv. Gillison [1899] I Q. B. 145.
v. Bristol v.
8 E.
&
B., at p.
1050.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LOAN OF GOODS
it is
199
Duties of
[a) to exercise
skill
with regard to
exer-
man would
special
skill
where
special skill
is
required
Isaack V. Clark (1614) 2 Bulstr. 306. Vaughan v. Menlove (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 468.
Wilson V. Brett (184.3) '" M. & W. 113. Grills. General Iron Screw Co. (1866) L. R.
C. P.,
at p.
is
612.
re-
[The dictum
quired
in
from
gratuitous
borrower, seems
never
to
have
been
acted upon.]
[b) to use
was
lent
at pp.
915, 916.
(f) to restore
demand
which
this
it
was
at
(reasonable
wear and
excepted).
But
Blakemore
out default on the part of the borrower. v. Bristol &= Exeter Ry. Co. (1858) 8 E. & B., at p.
1050.
440. Unless
a contrary intention
is
expressed or
is
Borrower's
'^tfamferlbie
personal
H3
Digitized
by Microsoft
200
to the
LAW OF CONTRACT
borrower
;
sible for
any
loss
which may
arise
from the
it.
fact that
to use
Bringloev. Morrice (1687) I Mod. zio, Camoys v. Scurr (1840) 9 C. & P. 383.
Determifiation
441.
j-jj^^g
The
^j.
lender
may demand
of oan
jgjj^.
expressed to be
made
'
..1(
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
442.
II
LOAN
OF MONEY
money
is
contract of loan of
a contract
Definition
whereby one person ("the lender") pays or agrees to pay consideration of a promise by another (" the borrower") to pay money in return, upon demand
or at a fixed or ascertainable date.
If the contract
266-268 (Book
II,
Part I) apply.
443.
The
or to
Contract
to
borrow W money gives rise to an action for damages. The measure of damages is the loss sustained by the
one party
(a)
^"
"^
in
(b)
Manchester Oldham Bank v. Cook (1884) 49 L. T. 674. Western Wagon Co. v. West [1892] i Ch. 271. Rogers \. Challis (1859) 27 Beav. 175. Sichelv. Masenthal (1862) 31 L. J. Ch., at p. 389.
444.
is
contract to lend
or to
borrow
money
Not
spedfi-
'"f""'
^f|
(b)
South African territories Co. v. Wallington [1898] A. C. 309. Rogers v. Challts, ubi sup.
pay
[There is an exception in the case of a contract to take up and for debentures of a joint-stock company (Companies (Cons.
185).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
202
Remedies of
LAW OF CONTRACT
II,
apply.
Money
at
deemed
to be
on loan to the
years
is
expiration
of six
Professional
447. Transactions by
g-^^^^j
way of
loan by a profes-
money-en
ers
1900, or in respect
security has been
of which
any
agreement or
made
discretion, either
when
ment of the
loan,
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
DEPOSIT
M8. In
a contract
IV
of deposit means
Definition
depositor ") places in the custody of another (" the depositee " or
(" the
by the
or
for reward.
449.
the contrary,
id) to
bound
Duties of
eposttee
{a) Care
What
is
reason-
""
each case
The Swan
Electric
275.
(i)
is
bound
as
to
exer-
such
care
and
skill
prudent
man would
where
is
required
Brabant 13 Co.
King [1895] A. C,
i
at p. 640.
Coldman
v. Hill [1919]
K. B. 443.
Digitized
by Microsoft
204
(ii)
LAW OF CONTRACT
A
as.
gratuitous depositee
cise
bound to exersuch skill as he has, and such care reasonably prudent and careful man
is
takes
of' his
;
own
igQa'^Q
property of the
like
description
Ao^>n,^X^(\
af
Coggs V. Bernard (1704) z Ld. Raym. 909. Doorman v. ^eniinsi^iSj^) z A. & E. Z56. .Sea/v. South Devon Ry. Co. (1864) 3 H. & C. 337. [The onus of proving such care is on the depositee (fViehe v. Demiis (191 3) XXIX T.'"L. R. 250).]
i'li-O'
jf|
(iii)'
depositee professing
or calling,
is
a, particular
trade,
10
V.
Brett (1843) 11
M. & W.
113.
o) 7'rjmy'.
Sc'"'l>o^o''Shy-Cosgrove.ligos^.2'!^,.^..ios.
{b)
No
user
'
[6^ to deal
\
in the
Av,'>
^V.-y
.
ii-jsi
manner
,j
by the depositor;
(1881)7 Q.
B.
V.vu
_-j^^^_^,,j_
j^f,L/%v.
p.fjio.
(f)
Resto-
1'^
(r)
ration
.J.
."
jj.
fdo^r
Wilkinson
v.
[18,93] 3 Ch. 154. "' ''^W' Story, Bailments, 99. l(i[A depositee is generally estopped from denying his depositor's the other hand, he has no clefence against a rightful title. owner. In a case of disputed title, his proper course is to interplead.
'
Re Tidd
On
that the
As'kgainst the depositor claiming: re-delivery, it is' a good defence depositee has beer? evicted by title paramount. But a
depositee cannot justify retaining the deposit as against the depositor, unless he does so by the authority of some third person, whose title
v.
Bond (1865) 6 B,
&
S.
225).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEPOSIT
450.
//AJ
205
Finder
finder of goods
is
who
tody of them
bound
to take
them
as a gratuitous depositee.
-^^N-t
^v.A
Doctor and Student, Dial, z, c. 38. Isaack Y. Clark (1614) Bulst. 306, 312.
\^^are, whether he is entitled to receive from the owner pensation for expenses properly incurred in relation to them. has no lien for such expenses. {Binstead v. .Buck z
(1777)
com-
He
Bl.
Wm.
1117
Nicholson v.
Chapman
{i-jq^) 2
H.
6I. 254).]
451.
mere depositee
has, as a rule,
no
agreement
('')
special,('')
and may by
local
custom have
finger,
ties
general lien
W
as
whar-
a general lien
deposited with
is
them
unless there
that
show an implied
Torke
the lien.W
(a)
v. Grenaugh (1704) Ld. Raymond, 868. Judsonw. Etheridge (1833) i C. & M. 743.
Jackson
(b)
v.
Cummins (1839)
W. & M.,
at p.
349.
Pickering (1878) 8 Ch. D. 172. (c) Holderness v. Collinson (1827) 7 B. & C. 212. (d) Brandas v. Barnett (1846) iz CI. & F., at p. 806; London Chartered Bank of Australia v. IVhite (1879) L. R. 4 App. Ca., at p. 422.
Moet
V.
[A " special " lien is confined to the articles in respect of which the charges were incurred ; a " general " lien extends to charges incurred in respect of other goods of the same depositor. As to liens, see Bk. III., Sect. X., Tit. II., 15911603.]
452.
person to
whom
Unauthor
ized consign-
ment
Digitized
by Microsoft
2o6
v.,
LAW OF CONTRACT
liability
,,
no
to
them.
Lethbridge
v. Phillips
Pledge
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION V
EMPLOYMENT
TITLE
454.
I
MASTER
AND SERVANT
is
contract of service
a contract a
whereby
Definition
wage
agrtees
or
work
subject to the
who
547.
to
employ him.
R.
V.
at p.
455.
raises
The mere
fact that
Voluntary
of a contract of service.
R. V. Thames Ditton (1785) 4 Dougl, 300. Foords. Morky (1859) 1 Post. & F. 496.
456.
The mere
between the
...
parties
Davies
v.
Domestic relationship
raises
no presumption
&
tor
or
which must extend beyond one year from the making thereof, is not
457.
contract of service,
Statute of
Digitized
by Microsoft
208
LAW OF CONTRACT
it
is
in writing [supra,-
Book
Banks
II,
Part
v.
I).
(18*18)
i
Bracegirdle
V.
HeaU
B.
&
Aid. 722.
Retainer
458.
The
his service
W
;
and retain
('')
him
as
time agreed
but,
in the absence
of express or
do.W
I
(b)
(c)
Tour (1853) 2 E. & B. 678. '4 -'" Lilleyy. Elwin {xiifV) 1 1 Q. B. 742. mIi Lagerwallv. Wilkinson (1899) 80 L. T. 5;. Turner v. Sawdon [1901] 2 K. B. 653.
Hochster v.
De
la
Devonald
v. Rosser (1906)
XXII
T. L. R. 682,
Wages or reward
459.
The
Where
expressly agreed
is
entitled to
parties.
5
Flight (1839)
M. & W.
114.
Medical
attendance
460.'"
The
with
medical
medicine,
unless
he
[No
It is a
general rule can be laid down with regard to providing food. matter of usage, depending on the nature of the service.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
209
Testimonials
The
master
is
Bird (1800)
3 Esp.
zoi.
Servants'
""""'"S'
at the suit
of a master against a
party
as
to
acted
his
]
Jac. 653),
463.
The
.
upon
1
his service
and
^a'" /
servant
continue
in
it
time agreed.
Bird
Richards
464.
fully,
The
servant
must serve
his
master faith-
Obedience
and obey
v.
his law^ful
commands.^
(a)
ilt
(b)
& Ad., at p. 790. Turner Robb V. Green [1895] 2 Q. B., at p. 10. The King v. St. John, Devizes (1829) 9 B. & C, Turner v. Mason (iS^s) '4 M. & W. 112.
Robinson (1833)
5 B.
at p.
900.
is
engaged
and he
has, expressly or
Digitized
by Microsoft
2IO
LAW OF CONTRACT
skill,
it.
he
is
liable if
he
Cornelius (1858) 5 C. B.
N.
S.
236.
Betrayal of
confidence
466.
alter
^
.
The
,
Servant
.
.
may
its
by him
so,
in
If he does
is
also
liable in
Lamb
Robb
V.
V.
Louis V.
v. Moore [1892] 2 Ch. 518. Evans [1893] I Ch. 218. Green [1895] 2 Q. B. 315 (C. A.). Smellie (1895) 73 L. T. 226 (C. A.).
[Semble,a. person
who,
of his service,
solicits
liability,
v.
456;
Irish
v.
Irish
13).]
Indemnity
467.
The
master
is
bound
to
liability,
doing
at
is
not
duced by
lawful.
his
master's
conduct to
believe
to
be
Adamsan
v.
at p.
72.
Digitized
by Microsoft
211
indemnity
"f"""^'''
Tke
servant
is
bound
to
by the master to
wrong-
M. &
G.,
at p.
165.
469.
fixed
The
by
the
is
Duration of
""''''"'
agreement
of
the
parties
or
by
usage.
[There was formerly
a presumption that an
indefinite hiring
was
domestic and menial servants but it is doubtful how far the presumption exists at the present day (Co. Litt., 42 b Beeston v. Collyer (1827) 4 Bing. 309 Fawcett v. Cash (1834) 5 B. & Ad. G. 935; Lilley v. Elwtn 904; Baxter v. Nurse {li^if) 6 M.
; ; ;
&
(1848) II Q. B. 742;
635)-]
Fairman
v.
Oakford (i860) 5 H.
&
N.
470.
An
agreement
or
to
pay
is
quarterly/^)
necessarily
Periodical
monthly/'')
weekly
('^)
wage
not
Beeston
(b)
(c)
Davis
V.
Rex
V.
Collyer (1827) 4 Bing. 309. Marshal/ (1S61) 4 L. T. 216. Great Tarmouth (1816) 5 M. &
v.
S.
114.
471.
servants
The engagement
is
of
domestic
or
menial
at
Month's
determinable
by either party
any
Digitized
by Microsoft
212
ter
LAW OF CONTRACT
on paying or tendering
a
month's wage in
lieu
thereof.
Fazucett v. Cash (1834) 5 B. Nozvlan V. Ablett (1835) 2 C.
&
Ad.,
at
pp. 908-909.
Moult
V.
Halliday [1898]
M. &
[The servant is not entitled to any compensation for loss of board {Gordon v. Potter (1859) i F. & F. 644). The term "menial" is wider than and includes "domestic." " No general rule can be laid down as to who do and who do not come within the category of menial servants." {Nicoll v. Greaves (1864) 33 L. J. C. P. 259.)]
Reasonable
notice
by reasonable notice.
is
What
is
reasonable notice
on
C. P. D. 591.
[Thefe seems to be some authority for saying that a hiring for an indefinite number of periods, ^.^. a yearly or monthly hiring, is determinable only by notice expiring at the end of one of such But where there is a hiring for one definite period, no periods. notice to determine at the end of such period is necessary, even though the contract contemplates a possible continuance of the hiring {Langton v. Carleton (1873) L. R. 9 Ex. 57). ]
,
Breach by
servant
or habituis
the lawful
commands of
his master,
grossly
is
may be
4ismissed by the
Digitized
by Microsoft
213
If the
wage
is
such dismissal.
W
v.
The same
fb)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Mason (1845) 14 M. & W. 112. (1831 ) 4 C. & P. 518. Harmer y. Cornelius (1858) 5 C. B. N. S. 236. Robinson v. Hindman (1800) 3 Esp. 235.
Turner
Callo V, Brouncker
(f)
Atkin V. Acton (1830) ,4 C. & P. 208. Turner v. Robinson (1833) 5 B. & Ad., at p. 907. Pearce v. Foster (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 536.
Lilley v. Elwin (1848) 1 1 Q. B. 742. Boston Deep ^ea Co. v. Ansell (1888) 39 Ch. D. 339. Turner v. Robinson (1833) 5 B. & Ad. 789. Boston Deep Sea Co. v. Ansell, ubi sup., at p. 364.
(g)
(h)
(i)
dismissal
is
Carry
[1906]
A. C. 122.)]
474.
ness or
The
servant
may
be dismissed
if,
from
sick- Hint" of
servant
But
if the servant
is
is
not,
make any
Cuckson
Sellen v.
v. Stones
(b)
Digitized
by Microsoft
214
Damages for
wrongful
dismissal
LAW OF CONTRACT
The
servant
475.
who
is
wrongfully dismissed
may
but,
may
Brace
Ground of
dismissal
it is
defence
if
show
that a
good
ground
missal
though the master may have alleged another ground of dismissal,^ or may have been unaware that such ground of dismissal existed. W
even
(a)
Baillie v. ^^7/(1838) 4 Bing. N. C. 638. Spotswgod V. Barrow ( 1 8 50) 5 Exch. 1 1 o. Willets V. Green (1850) 3 C. & K. 59.
(b)
Death of
party
477.
contract of service
is
determined by the
or, servant.
Farrow v. Wilson (1869) L. R. 4 C. P. 744. Stubbs V. Holywell Ry. Co. (1867) L. R. 2 Ex. 311.
[Presumably where a contract of hiring and service is determined by the death of master or servant, or otherwise without default on either side, in the absence of agreement or custom to the contrary the servant or his representatives will be entitled to payment in
respect of services rendered
V.
up
Powell (i J () 5)' 6
T. R. 320.
s.
2).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
215
con-
Bankruptcy
"f """''''
of service
is
of the master.
Thomas
v.
Williams (1 834)
Ad.
&
E. 685.
,
[Quare, whether, in the case of partner employers, the dissolution of the partnership or the death of one partner dissolves a contract of hiring and service (^Hohson v. Cowley (1858) 27 L. J. Ex. 205 ; Tasker v. Shepherd (1861) 6 H. & N. 575; Brace v. Colder [1895] 2 Q. B. 253).]
479.
Gratuitous
being under
service
not enforceable
and gratuitous
may
notice.^
and servant
persons
tract
(a)
and duties of
of service, so far
Lees
Sykes
v. V.
same
is
applicable.
Bing. 34.
&
E. 693.
(b)
Keane Evans
Francesco v.
(1795) 2 H. Bl. 512. v. iValton (1867) L. R. z C. P. 615. Barnum (1890) 45 Ch. D., at p. 443.)
v.
(But see
De
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Definition
II
MASTER
AND APPRENTICE
is
480.
Contract of apprenticeship
a contract
to
employer
V.
in
it.
Rex
Rex
&
C. 97.
240.
V.
Statute of
Frauds
which must extend beyond one year from the making thereof,
481.
contract of apprenticeship,
is
it
is
in writing
[supra, 220,
Book
II,
Part
I).
s.
Statute of Frauds
(1677)
4.
[In practice, contracts of apprenticeship are always in writing, By such " indentures of apprenand usually in writing under seal. ticeship " the apprentice and some one or more of his relations and
friends usually covenant that he shall faithfully serve his master
and
obey
his lawful
commands.
The
teach.]
Infant apprentice
482.
An
for
infant
may
contract to
become an apis
prentice,
benefit,
and will be
the
liable, if
the contract
for his
Digitized
by Microsoft
217
(*)
contract to serve/'')
tract are not released
(a)
The
by his
Walter
v.
Everard [1891]
Q.
B.
369.
(b)
(c)
Gylbert V. Fletcher (1629) Cro. Car. 179. Cuming v. Hill (18 ig) 3 B. & Aid. 59.
483.
The
apprentice. Duty
of
and teach him the trade or business apprentice has been apprenticed.
Ellen V. Topp (i 851) 6 Ex. 424.
which the
"""^'^''
484.
.
The
.
master
is
Apprentice's
earnings
the apprentice.
The King
v. Wantage (i8oi) Thompson v. Havelock (1808) The King v. Bradford (181 3)
i i
East, 601.
Camp. 527.
who
icnows that
an apprentice, the master may maintain an action against such third person to recover compensation for the apprentice's woric and
he
is
labour (^Foster
v.
485.
The
of
his master,
and obey
lawful commands.
486.
When
Domestic
the master must provide him with necessary food, medical attendance, and medicine.
Reg.
V.
"ff""'*"'
Smith (1837) 8 C.
&
P. 153.
Digitized
by Microsoft
2l8
Wages of
apprentice
LAW OF CONTRACT
is
Bl.
Comm. 428.
Death of
party
488.
contract of apprenticeship
is
determined
Return of
"
489. If a
premium
is
%'^h""
apprentice, there
agreement, to
Bankruptcy
of master
490. Where,
at
apprenticed or
of bankruptcy
if either
to that effect, a
of apprenticeship or
of agreement
and
if
clerk, or of
some person on
his behalf,
Digitized
by Microsoft
219
trustee, subject to
him
or on his
commencement of
34.
491.
When
it
Return of
^l^^^'"^//
bankrupt, or any
person
acting
on
last , transfer
ment
to
some other
person.
Ibid.
492.
The
master
may
Misconduct
''
of apprenticeship on the ground of the apprentice's misbehaviour,(*) unless in the case of habitual theft,('')
or
(?)
"Pf""**"
(b)
{c)
Wins tone v. Linn (1823) i B. & C. 460. Cox V. Mathews (1861) 2 F. & F. 397.
Learoyd, v. Brook [1891]
Westwick
V.
Digitized
by Microsoft
220
Parish and
fnarine atprentices
LAW OF CONTRACT
The
provisions of this Title do not apply to
493.
Parish
t
apprentices,
nor
to
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
494. In
III
WORK
Title
a
AND LABOUR
contract
this
of
work and
("the em-
Definition
employee") agrees
to
work
for another
495.
Gratuitous
but,
the promisor
liable if
and
Elsee V.
2
5
Esp. 74.
496.
.
When
no reward
r
I
is
it
is
to
be remunerated.
Wirdnam (1824)
v.
Lamhurn
Hutton
V.
Harrison v.
& P. 434. Cruden (1841) 2 M. & Gr. 253. James (1862) 7 H. & N. 804.
i
C.
Co.
at p.
667.
which must extend beyond one year from the making thereof
497.
contract of wor-k and labour
:
Statute of
Digitized
by Microsoft
222
is
LAW OF CONTRACT
it
is
in writing
(Book
Part
I,
220).
(1677)
s.
Statute of Frauds
4.
Pttty of
498.
It is
empoyer
reward agreed,
is
also the
a question
to the circumstances
of each
cascW
(a)
Brown
Hughes
v.
(b)
W., at p. 193. Fechter y. Montgomery (1863) 33 Beav. zz, Ex parte Maclure (1870) L. R. 5 Ch. App. 737. Turner v. Savidon [igoi] z K. B., at p. 659.
V.
Si
&
P. Z04.
Devonald
V.
Rosier
&
Sons
(1905) 93 L. T. 274.
Duty of
empoyee
499.
^^^
It is
work agreed
it,
manner and
performing
have
Clarke
he pro-
fessed to
at
v.
Harmer
v.
Z36,
Breach of
500.
It is aii
'""
and labour,
which
Digitized
by Microsoft
223
will
not,
that
the employee
its
termination,
make
and in consequence of
this
employment.
also to
Tuck
Breach of
titles
and
an injunction.
V. Priester y.
(1887) 19 Q. B. D. 629.
Pollard
Lamb
v.
[An
similar
circumstances
who have
obtained
v.
information or materials
Strange (1848) 2
De G. &
Sm. 652).]
501.
has bestowed
labour
Lien of
and
skill,
chattel "'"P'S"
upon
it
Scarfe v. Morgan (1838) 4 M. & W., at p. 283. Ex parte Willoughby (1881) 16 Ch. D., at p. 610.
[The lien is created, even though the employer is not the owner of the chattel, if he had authority (express or implied) for the employment. i^Keene v. Thomas [1905] i K. B. 136).]
502.
The
Lien de^p"jJ"/j/''
of
gopds which are no longer in his possession, unless both the goods in his possession, and the goods no
I
Digitized
by Microsoft
224
LAW OF CONTRACT
him under
one contract.
Blakev. Nicholson (1814) 3 M. & S. 167. Chase V. Westmore (1816) 5 M. & S. 180.
Employment
on credit
Mitchell (1815) 4
Camp. 150.
Payment hy
instalments
work and
must be
workman
re-
complete
it,('')
he
is
nevertheless entitled to
as
be paid for so
carried out.
(a)
much
of the work
he has actually
(b)
Menefonew. Athavies (1764) 3 Burr. 1592. Appleby's Myers ( 1 867') L. R. 2 C. P., at p. 660 (per Blackburn, Roberts V. HaveLck (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 404.
.
J.)
[An agreement to do the whole work for a lump sum will usually be construed as an agreement that the employee is not to be paid anything until the whole* work is complete {Appleby v. Myers^ ubi
sup.).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE IV WAGES
505. In the case of
workmen
as defined in
506,
Payment
in
of the realm, and deductions from wages, are prohibited, subject to the provisions and exceptions of
the
Truck
1887,
s.
10
1896,
sS.
1-4.
[The prohibition even extends to the deduction of damages awarded by a court to the employer against the workman ( Williams V. North's Navigation Collieries [1906] A. C. 136).]
" in "Workman" 505 does not include a domestic or menial servant but, save
506.
The
expression "
workman
as aforesaid,
servant in
means any person whoj being a labourer, husbandry, journeyman artificer, handi-
whether under the age of twenty-one years or above that age, has entered into or works under a contract with an employer, whether the contract
labour,
execute any
work
or labour.
definition
Truck Act, 1887, s. z (incorporating by reference the " workmen " in the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875).
Squire
v.
of
Midland Lace
Co.
[1905] z K. B. 448.
this
[For the meaning of " employers " and " wages " within see Truck Act, 1831, s. 25.]
I
Digitized
by Microsoft
226
Payment of
lie
LAW OF CONTRACT
No
wages may be paid to any workman,
spirits,
507.
as
houses
defined in
wine,
any
office,
owner
or occupier of such
workman
s.
1883,
3.
9.
s.
11
(l).
[The two last named Acts contain the words," or other house of entertainment " after the words " fermented liquor."]
Attachment
*j
508.
No
^ig
by any Court.
'
Wages Attachment
of"
workman "
company
"but
it
has been
a year
secretary of a
at
100
{Gordon
v.
Jennings (iSS'z) 9
Q.
B. t). 85).]
Preferential
^^^* ^^
rupt, OT
'
^^
1
ciaimsfor
wages
of a deceased debtor whose estate is being r> T 1 r administered by the Court according to the law of
'
is
being
wound up under
the
Digitized
by Microsoft
WAGES
taxes,
viz.
:
227
all
other
debts,
[a^
(^)
months before the date of the receiving order or the commencement of the winding up, not exceeding fifty pounds all wages of any labourer or workman, whether
or the four
company during
3.
[" Salary " includes commission of varying amount payable to a commercial traveller (Re Klein (1906) xxii T. L. R. 664).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
510.
Contract of agency
is
a contract
whereby
I,
121, 123)
[No form
is
is
except in the cases specified in 124 of representation created by a contract of agency is termed an " authority." An instrument under seal by which an agent is appointed to represent the principal generally (including the execution of deeds and conduct of legal proceedings) is termed a " letter of attorney " or " power of attorney."]
required
(Book
I) supra.
The power
Voluntary
^\.\..
person
who
by
an agent,
but
if
he
acts
liabilities
and acquires
Joint agency
512.
person
An
is,
authority conferred
prima facie,
is
a joint authority.
When
an
authority
joint,
it
Digitized
by Microsoft
229
If
it
is
exercisable by
all
authorised.
Brown v, Andrew (1849) 18 L. J. Q. B. 153. Re Liverpool Household Stores (1890) 59 L. J. Ch. 625.
Guthrie v. Armstrong (1822)
[But not by some of them (Co. Litt. 181 b.) 5 B. & Aid. 628.]
See, however,
513.
An
Extent of
""* ""^"^
which
is
necessary
do such
Bnyley
v.
act.
Mullens
v.
514.
An
agent
General
"^'"^
taking, has authority to do every lawful thing necessary or usually incidental thereto.
Young
Peers
V. Cole
v.
(1837)
3 Bing.
N.
C,
at p.
732.
Edmunds v. Bushell {i%6s) L. R. i Q. B. 97. talker v. G.ff. Ry. Co. (1867) L. R. 2 Ex. 228, Watteau v. Fenwick [1893] i Q. B. 346.
515.
It is
General duty
"-^"S^"'
In the absence of
Digitized
by Microsoft
230
instructions,
LAW OF CONTRACT
he must pursue the accustomed course
is
employed. W
Guerreiro v. Peile (i8zo) 3 B. & Aid. 616. Smart v. Sandars (1846) 3 C. B. 380.
Butler
(b)
(c)
V. Knight (1,867) L. R. 2 Ex. 109. Bexwelly. Christie (1776) i Cowp. 395. Comber v. Anderson (1808) i Camp. 523. Foster w. Pearson (1834) i C. M. & R., at pp. 858-9.
Skill
516.
The
'^agen7
skill, care,
and diligence
is
ness for
which he
Heys
V.
Lee. V,
employed.
Tindall (1861) i B. & S. 296. Walker (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 121,. Commonwealth Co. v. Weber [1905] A. C,
skill
at p.
70.
depends upon what is usual or proper in the matter or business in hand {Beal v. South Devon Ry. Co. (1864) If a person atts as agent gratuitously, he is 3 H. & C. 337). generally bound only to exercise such skill as he has, unless he has held himself out as competent, in which case he must be reasonably competent (Shiells v. Blackburne (1789) I H.-Bl. 158; Fish v. Kelly (1864) 17 C. B. N. S., at p. 206).]
standard of
[The
Agent cane
517.
gj^pj-ggg
The
qj.
ega e
implied
by deputy.W
Such an authority may be implied from the conduct of the parties, or from the usage of a trade or
business
;
it
is
matter of
indifference
acts personally or
by
employment of
a substitute.
(b)
Combe's Case (1614) 9 Co. Rep. 77 b. Schmaling V. Thomlinson (181 5) 6 Taunt. 147. De Bussche v. Alt (1878) 8 Ch. D. 286. Hemming v. Hale (1859) 7 p. B. N. S. 487. De Bussche v. Alt ubi sup,, at p. 31 o.
Digitized
by Microsoft
231
Liability for
The
agent
is
his principal
and to third
'" '^^'"'
defaults of
any persons
whom
he appoints, whether
him
in the
no
liability
for
Lockwood V. Abdy (1845) 14 Sim. 437. New Zealand and Australian Land Co.
374-
Watson (1881)
Q.
B.
D.
agent is authorised by a principal to appoint another be the agent of such principal, and the appointee consents, an immediate relationship of principal and agent may be produced between principal and appointee {De Bussche v. Alt (1878)
[If an
expressly
to
8 Ch.
result
D. 286; Powell
is
V.
Jones [1905]
K. B. 11).
But such a
not
commonly
intended.]
519.
faith
The
strictest
good
Uberrima
exclusive benefit.
Pariente
Andrew
Ramsay [1903]
K. B. 635.
520.
The
all
Duty of Dis-
which he
sell
enters as agent.
In par-
an agent to
may
agent to buy
may
disclosure
13
Digitized
by Microsoft
232
LAW OF CONTRACT
The
onus
is
of the circumstances^
of proving that
agent.
sell).
upon the
Robinson
Mollett (1875) L. R. 7
to
buy).
Secret profit
521.
The
agent
may
consent
private
make any
into
of any transaction
which he
any
trans-
action in
interest
which he has an
(as
of his principal. W
cipal
ate
may
the
come known
(a)
(b)
Parker v. McKenna (1874) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 96. Harrington v. t^tctoria Graving Dock (1878) 3 Q. B. D. 549. Andrew v. Ramsay [1903] 2 K. B. 635. Champion v. Rigby (1830) i Russ. & M. 539. Lyddon v. Moss (1859) 4 De G. & J. 104.
[The principal may recover from the agent any secret advantage which he may have obtained, and also (but only where the agent has been guilty of fraud) the amount of the commission paid by him to the agent (Hippislej v. Knee [1905] I K. B. I ; Andrew v. Ramsay^
ubi sup.
See
527).
Fiduciary
character
522. If an agent
who
is
employed
to sell or pur-
in
(^)
of the
liability
to
account, the
between
Digitized
by Microsoft
PRINCIPAL. AND
agent and principal
is
AGENT
233
Russ.'
& M.
53 (approved in Austin
v.
Chambers (1838) 6 CI. & F. i). Harris v. Truman (i88z) 9 Q. B. D. Z64. (b) Lister v. Stubbs (1890) 45 Ch. D. I; Powell I K. B. II.
\.
Jones [1905]
523.
title
The
agent
may
as his agent.
Dixon
V.
Hammond (1819)
z B.
&
Aid. 310.
v.
[For some exceptions to this rule, see Hardman (1832) 9 Bing., at p. 382; Biddle v. Bond (1S6 5) 6 B. Rogers v. Lambert [1891] i Q. B. 318.]
Wilcock
S.
&
225
524.
The
special duties
-'
from his own and from that of other persons/*) keep and render clear accounts/'') produce documents for inspection by a proper person when requiredjW and be ready to pay over on
principal separate
"^'"^
to his principal.^
If he
he
will be chargeable
refusal to pay.(^)
with
interest
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Tipping (1846) 9 Beav., at p. 292. Haig (1854) zo Beav,, at p. 239. Dadsa/ellv. Jacobs (1887) 34 Ch. D. 278. Harsant v. Blaine (1887) 56 L. J. Q. B., at p. 513.
Gray
v.
Pearse
v. v.
Green (1819)
Jac.
& W.
135.
Harsant
Digitized
by Microsoft
234
Agents
allowances
LAW OF CONTRACT
money
is
received to the
entitled to deduct
including
unlawful purposes-W.
Dale v. Sollet (1767) 4 Burr. ZI33. Bayntun v. Cattle (1833) I M. & Rob. 265. Bone V. Ekless (i860) 5 H. & N. 9Z5.
[The sums which the agent is entitled to deduct include sums refunded by him to persons who have paid the same to him under mistake of fact (Book I, 91), or under a contract set aside on the ground of fraud, or otherwise improperly obtained from such persons by the agent. And if, before the-agent has actually paid or allowed
such sums to his principal, they are reclaimed by the' parties entitled, the agent will be personally liable to such third parties in respect thereof. Buller v. Harrison (1777) 2 Cowp. 565 (mistake) Owen Co. V. Cronk [1895] I Q. B. 265 (duress); Murray v. Mann
;
&
(1848)
Q.
B.
Ex parte Edwards (1884) 2 Exch. 538 (fraud) D. 747 (improper payment in bankruptcy).]
;
13
Secrets of principal
526.
interest
The
agent
may
not
make
use, against
the
of his
principal,
formation
obtained
Evans [1893]
Profits by
agent
ment
profits
is
entitled to all
in the
course of his
agent's ordi-
Digitized
by Microsoft
PRINCIPAL
si
AND
AGEl^T
profit
235
on or bribe, W and also including every from the principal's own property.
(a)
made
(b)
Diplock V. Blackburn (1811) 3 Camp. 43. Morison v. Thompson (1874) L. R. g Q, B. 480. Mayor of Salfords. Lever [1891] i Q. B. 168.
Andrew
Hippisley (c)
v.
v.
Docker
v.
Shallcross
Ramsay [1903] 2 K. B. 635. Knee [1905] i K. B. i. Somes (1834) z My. & K. 655. v. Oldham (1862) z J. & H. 609.
528.
The
and
agent
who
Liability of
"^
who
gives
it,
are
/""""
jointly
loss sustained
by him
under
this ,
anything which
or
is
may
not
Q. B. 168.
[Such persons are now also liable to criminal proceedings under the Corrupt Practices Act, 1906, s. i.]
529. If
agent's
all
the
principal
has
stipulated
is
for
the
Agent
in
labour, he
entitled to
his
-
profits
made
by the
agent
in
employing
course
outside
the
of his
employment.
Thompson
v.
Havelock (1808)
Camp. 527.
530.
sell
Where
credit,
an agent for
is
sale
on
he
Digitized
by Microsoft
236
LAW OF CONTRACT
(^del
commission
is
4 of the Statute of Frauds {Couturier v. Hastie'(i8^2) 8 Exch. 40). Such an agent only guarantees the solvency of his principal, not the performance of the contract (Gabriel v. Churchill [i^i^] 3 K. B. 1272).]
yigexi's commission
531.
fhe
agent
is
entitled to receive
cipal the
tract or
by usage,
where none
pa,rties.
is
fixed, to receive a
Forfeiture of
532.
^he
commission
loses
If,
in
it
from him,
White v. Lady Lincoln (1803) 8 Ves., at p. 371. Hursts. Holding (1810) 3 Taunt. 32. (b) Salomans s. Pender (1865) 3 H. & C. 639. Andrew v. Ramsay [1903] 2 K. B. 635. But see Hippisley v. Knee [1905] i K. B. 1.
Commission
due
is
532)
Digitized
by Microsoft
237
commission
so soon as
properly
done
all
from
his
through owing to
is
not responsible.('')
(b)
Harford s. Wilson (1807) I Taunt. 12. Lockwoodv. Levick (i860) 8 C. B. N. S. 603. Webb V. Rhodes (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 732. Hilly. Kitching (1846) 3 C. B. 299.
534.
The
agent
is
entitled to be indemnified
by
Agenfs
'" ^"'"^^
of
all
incurred by
Lacey
him
in the course
of his employment.
D. 685. D. 779.
v. Hill,
B.
535.
The
agent
is
entitled to be indemnified
by
indemnity
his principal
at
from
liability for
to
&
E. 57.
536.
The
Agent's
lien
Digitized
by Microsoft
238
i'LAW
OF CONTRACT
such property. W
by him
in relation to
By
agree-
ment
may extend
to claims in
erty over
(a)
which the
Hammonds
v.
lien
is
exercised/'')
'
Houghton y. Matthews (1803) 3 B. & P., at p. 494. (b) Bock V. GVrmw (1861) 2 De G. F. & J. 434.
[Custom allows
general
lien
to
factors,
brokers, solicitors,
Termination
of agency
537. Subject to the provisions of 541-546, ^ contract of agency may be determined in any
II,
Part
I).
Death
parties
or
538. Except
tract
as
insanity of
of agency
though
unknown
'''
Blades
Brew
V.
Free {liig) ^'&ScC. 167. ,, \ ,, (^"tn; J. P. 67. I Nunn (1879) 4 Q- B. D., at p. 665 (insanity).
Book
I,
141. J
Bankruptcy
539,
contract of agency
is
of
is
not determined by
Digitized
by Microsoft
239
Goldschmidt
Markwick
(b)
Phelps
V.
Lyon (i8iz) 4 Taunt. 534. Hardingham (i88o) 15 Ch. D. 339. Lyle (1839) 10 A. & E. 113.
v. v.
[In Dixon v. Ewart (18 17) 3 Mer. 322, it was held that the bankruptcy of the principal did not revoke an agent's authority to do a merely formal act in completion of a transaction already legally binding, the act being one which the bankrupt himself might have been compelled to execute, notwithstanding his bankruptcy.]
540.
When
the
principal
has
been
is
adjudged
Relation
deemed
first
back
to
as
act
the
principal
is
afterwards
adjudicated
bankrupt.
But
apply so
as to affect prejudi-
cially
transactions
between
the
agent
and
in
third
persons,
faitTi
who
good
the agent,
when
him
him and
quired by
{\i-j2) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 534. Turguand (iSSi) L. R. 7 App. Ca. 79. Palmer v. Day [1895] 2 Q. B. 618.
Exp. Snowball
ss.
31, 45.
Digitized
by Microsoft
240
Revocation
LAW OF CONTRACT
as hereinafter
541. Except
provided ( 542-546),
of authority
may
(as
between the
But
if
such revocation
is
damages
Campanari v. Jervis, C. J.
Woodburn (1854)
^-
^'
P-
47'
P^''
Read
(b)
v. Anderson (1882) 10 Q. B. D., at p, 107. Frith v. Frith [1906] A. C. 254. Mutzenbecher v. La Aseguradora [1906] i K. B. 254.
[No form of
(Bromley
v.
revocation
is
necessary.
Authority
coupled with
interest
542.
When
him some
benefit,
irrevocable
(" authority
Smart
Morton (1830) 10 B. & C. 731. Sandars (1848) 5 C. B., at p. 917. Carmichael's Case [1896] 2 Ch. 643.
v. v.
authority
is
Authority
acted on
543.
When
do
or
Digitized
by Microsoft
241
13Q.
B.
D. 779.
[This clause follows the language of Hawkins, J., and Bowen, L. J., the case cited, ^uare, does it mean anything more than that,
is
a principal improperly revokes the authority, he indemnify the agent in such a case ?]
liable
to
544. Subject to the provisions of 542, 543, an authority which has been partially executed is
revocable as regards future transactions
;
Authority
^fj^lg/"'
but the
in
agent
is
entitled to
as
terms of 534
liabilities
and contingent
already
in
respect
of
any
transactions
Simpson
v.
Lamb (1856)
(b)
Warlow
v.
\Semble^ this rule probably proceeds on the assumption that the principal has implicitly contracted not to revoke the authority The death of the principal is not, in such case, unreasonably. an unreasonable revocation (Campanari v. Woodburn (1854) 15
C. B. 400).J
545.
Any
is
Powers of
^"'^"'^
pursuance of a
poyi^er
of
by reason that before the payment or act the donor of the power had died or become lunatic, of
unsound mind, or bankrupt, or had revoked the power, if the fact of death, lunacy, unsoundness of
Digitized
by Microsoft
242
LAW OF CONTRACT
at
the
making
But
the person
141 {^)
).
money
so paid
],ike
remedy
against
the
if
made by him.
;
88
1,
s.
47
s.
23.
Powers exfrrevocaik"
power,
expressed to be irrevocable, or if a
power of
attorney,
is
whether given
in the
the
power cannot in the first case be revoked at any time, nor, in the second case,
be revoked during that fixed time either
by anything done by the donor of the power without the concurrence of the donee of the power, or by the death,
marriage, lunacy, unsoundness of mind, or
(ii)
bankruptcy of the donor of the power any act done as aforesaid by the donee of the power, in pursuance of the power, will
;
be
as valid
as
if
Digitized
by Microsoft
243
donor of the power without the concurrence of the donee of the power, or the
death,
by notice
of anything done
This
applies only to
by instruments executed
December
ss.
31st,
1882.
&
9.
547. Save
as
and
liabilities
Book
( 126-147).
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION VI
^:
Definition
548.
A common
inn
is
as willing to
travellers generally.
(1584) 8 Co. Rep. 32.
Soulby (i860) 8 C. B.
V.
Holder
V.
N.
2
S.
254.
B. 284.
Orchard
Bush &
Co.
[1898]
Q.
Liability to
549.
The
keeper of a
common
offers
receive
page of any
traveller,
who
and
at reasonable
room
in the
innjW
traveller pays, or
no rea-
An
innkeeper
(a)
'
in advance.
(b)
(c)
Lamondy. Richard [iSgj] 1 Q. B. 541. Browne v. Brandt [1902] I K. B. 696. The Queen v. Rymer (1877) 2 Q. B. D. 136.
Pinchon's Case (161 1) 9 Co. Rep. 87 b.
,,
(d)
Safety of
guest's belongings
common
inn
is
an-
Digitized
by Microsoft
245
money brought
Calye's Case
[A guest is a person who uses an inn for any ordinary convenience of a traveller, whether this includes lodging or not (^Bennett v. Mellor (1793) 5 T. R. 273; Orchard v. Bush Co. [1898] 2 Q. B. 284). person who hires rooms of an innkeeper, but as a lodger merely, is not a guest {Lamond v. Richard [1897] i Q. B. 451); nor is a person who hires a room for a specific purpose, not being an ordinary incident of travel, e.g. as a show-room to exhibit his wares (Burgess v. Clements (18 15) 4 M. & S. 306). A person who comes to an inn as a guest cannot remain on indefinitely in that character. Whether he has ceased to be a guest and become a lodger, seems to be a question of fact, not of law {Lamond v. Richard (ubi ?/>.)).]
&
551.
The
innkeeper
is
loss or
Excuses of
"'" "^'''
whom
he
is
responsible,
[.?
Clements (181 5) 4
M. &
S.
Morgan
& N.
Co.
306. 265.
(1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 515.
552.
No
innkeeper
loss
is
liable to
;to
make good
to
any
guest any
of or injury
goods or property
Limit of '"'^'y
Digitized
by Microsoft
246
LAW OF CONTRACT
his inn (not
brought to
being
horse or other
live'
appertaining thereto,
or any
thirty
pounds
( 1
unless
or
injured
through
or
the
w^ilful
act,
default, or neglect
servant in his
(2) such
employ
goods or property
shall
innkeeper.
innkeeper
liability,
may
that such
a
tp
"act"
only
(^Squire v.
Wheeler (1867)
(b)
s.
\.
Conditions
of exemption
guest
is
through such
innkeeper's default
unable
2.
Copy of
must cause
at
least
one
7xhibiud"
copy of
s.
Digitized
by Microsoft
247
55^>
supra), printed
a
in
plain
type, to
be exor
hibited in
en-
and he
is
be so exhibited.
Innkeepers' Liability Act, 1863,
9.
3.
[The copy exhibited must be substantially accurate Bacon (1877) 2 Ex. D, 463).]
(^Spice
v.
555.
The
lien
for his
innkeeper's
lien
temporary
use,
innkeeper to be so sent-W
(a)
(b)
Robinson v. Walter (1616) 3 Bulstr. 269. Mulliner v. Florence (1878) 3 Q. B. D. 484. Gordon v. Silber (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 491. Robins V. Gray [1895] 2 Q. B. 501. Broadwoodv. Granara (1854) 10 Exch. 417.
556.
The
Security
'"*
and
of
lien. Angus
V.
goods are detained by an innlceeper in the exercise of he will not be liable for loss of or damage to them unless negligence is proved (Angus v. McLachlan^ ubi sup.).']
his right of lien,
[When
Digitized
by Microsoft
248
Enforcement
^^"
LAW OF CONTRACT
The
innkeeper
557.
may
sell
left
expenses of such
able unless
(a)
sale.
is
not exercis-
weeks
one
at
least
month
try
district
where the
an advertisement con-
The
sale
must on demand be paid by the innkeeper to the person by whom the goods sold were deposited or
left.
Innkeepers Act, 1878,
s.
i.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
VII
CARRIAGE
558.
A common
carrier
is
a person
who
holds Common
himself out
reward, without
who
chooses
employ him.
Coggs V. Bernard (1704) z Ld. Raym., at p. 918. Gishourn v. Hurst (17 10) i Salk. 249. Liver Alkali Co. v. Johnson (1874) L. R. g Ex. 338.
common
carrier
who
does
not ply regularly between fixed termini (^Nugent v. Smith (1876) I C. P. D., at p. 427 ; Liver Alkali Co. v. 'Johnson., ubi sup."). One
may be
common
Peninsular
(1848) 6 C.
B., at p. 786).]
559.
A common
carrier
is
bound
to accept
and
Liability
_
who
offers to
pay his
'^"''''^
he professes to carry, and that he has no reasonable excuse for refusing them.
as
Jackson V. Rogers (1684) z Show. 327. Batson v. 'Donovan (1820) 4 B. & Aid. zi. Garton v. Bristol i^ Exeter Ry. Co. (1861) i B. & S., at p. 162. Dickson V. G. N. Ry. Co. (1886) 18 Q. B. D., at p. 183.
[The sum charged by the carrier must be reasonable {Pickford v. Grand Junction Ry. Co. (1841) 8 M. & W., at pp. 377-378; G. W. Ry. Co. V. Sutton (1869) L. R. 4 H. L., at p. 237). J
Digitized
by Microsoft
250
Payment
advance
in
LAW OF CONTRACT
A
V.
560.
as a
carrier
is
entitled to
payment of
his
charge
Batson
&
Aid., at p. 28.
Outside
radius
561.
carriage
A common
beyond
carrier
who
comes
liable as a
common
whole journey.
Muschamp
421.
v.
Lanes.
Co.
(1841) 8
at
M. & W.
ff.
miby
V.
H. & N.,
pp.
709
Safe custody
562.
A common
is
carrier
is
bound
safely to carry
in
that
all
wear and
is
such
loss or
injury
owner of the
goods.C'')
Nugent Hudson
(d)
Smith (1876) i C. P. D. 423. Baxendale (i8j7)2H. &N. 575. Blofver V. G. W. Ry. Co. (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 655. Lister v. Lanes. Toris. Ry. Co. [1903} i K. B. 878. Baldwin v. London, Chatham i^Dover Ry. Co. (1882) 9 Q. B. D. 582.
\.
V.
Delay
563.
within
a reasonable
Digitized
by Microsoft
CARRIAGE
carnage
;
251
for
but
he
is
not
answerable
delay in
C. P. 385.
564.
for
A common
entrusted
carrier
to
remains liable
until
as
such
Duration of
^'"^'''''5'
goods
him,
ered
them
or
tendered
delivery
But
accept
if
the con-
signee or
or if the
his
assignee
fails
to
delivery/'')
carrier
retains
possession
lien,
of the goods
under
express
a lawful claim
of
as
or under a contract
or
implied
wharfinger
or
warehousecarrier,
man,W he
or
in
as
ceases to be liable as a
liable as
common
and becomes
respect
depositee, or as lien-holder,
wharfinger,
or
warehouseman
so
respectively,
in his
of
the
goods
remaining
possession.
(a)
W
v. Gatliffe
v.
Bourne
McKean
CI.
&
F. 45.
L. R. 6 Ex. 36.
Patscheiderv. G. W. Ry. Co. (1878) 3 Ex. D. 153. Hodkinson v. L. dr" N. W. Ri. Co. (1884) 14 Q. B. D. 228. (b) HeugJb V. L. &^ N. W. Ry. Co. (1870) L. R. 5 Ex. 51. (c) Shepherd V. Bristol Ry. Co. (i868)L. R. 3 Ex. 189. Mitchellw. Lanes. 6- Torks. Ry. Co. (1875) L. R. 10 Q. B. 256. (d) Crouch V. G. W. Ry. Co. (1858) 3 H. & N. 183. Hudson V. Baxendale (1857) z H. & N., at p. 581.
the absence of any agreement or usage to the contrary, a carrier is bound' to deliver goods at the consignee's Mersey Navigation Co. (1793) 5 T. R. address {Hyde v. Trent
[In
common
389)-]
&
Digitized
by Microsoft
252
Special
LAW OF CONTRACT
565. Subject to the provisions of 575, a common carrier may limit or vary his liability by special
contract
(*)
;
but no
public
affects
notice
or
declaration
limits or in
anywise
the liability at
common
law of any
common
carrier in respect of
its
any goods
to be carried
by him/'') unless
(b)
(c)
lb.
s.
4,
sf
Walker v.rorks.
N. Mid. Ry.
Co.
(1853)
z E.
&
B. 750.
Valuable
566.
No common
carrier
is
^^
'
manufactured
notes of
bills,
foreign),
plate,
plated articles,
materials,
lace)
furs,
containesd
any package
accom-
in
any public
Digitized
by Microsoft
CARRIAGE
conveyance,
253
ten
when
the
value
thereof exceeds
567, or a
s.
I.
(b)
1,
[The wording of s. i. of the Carriers Act, if strictly followed, would lead to the conclusion, that a carrier might escape responsibility for valuable goods by refusing to accept the insurance payment or engagement. But such a construction would be inconsistent
with
s.
3 {post, 568).]
increased
'^
566, concerning
"^^'^
which such a declaration has been made, and the value whereof exceeds the sum of ten pounds, a common carrier may demand and receive an increased rate of charge.
Such increased
,
rate
must
part of the
veyance
and
all
packages to or
at
such
office
are
it
bound by such
having come to
knowledge.
Carriers Act, 1830,
s.
2.
Digitized
by Microsoft
254
Receipt
LAW OF CONTRACT
When
the value
5gg^
so declared,
charge has
same
to
is
not
is
liable to
and
if
such receipt
notice
not given
when
the
required, or such
has not
been
affixed,
common
carrier
is
not entitled to
any benefit under 566, 567, but is responsible as at the common law, and liable to refund the
increased rate of charge.
Carriers Act, 1830,
s.
3.
[The construction which has been put upon the somewhat ambiguous contents of ss. 1-3 of the Carriers Act is that the consignor can in no case claim in respect of a package cpming within 566, unless he has made the declaration therein described (Hart On the other hand, the decv.'BaxeHdale (1851) 6 Exch. 769). laration having been made, the carrier can claim no exemption on the ground that no increased charge was paid, if in fact no such charge was demanded (G. N. R. Co. v. Behrens (1862) 7 H. &
:
N. 95o).J
Recovefs of
charge
569.
office
When
at the
of the
common
tents
thereof declared
of
of such
loss
or
damage
Digitized
by Microsoft
CARRIAGE
is
25s
so paid.
Carriers Act, 1830,
7.
l^are,
en route ^1
570.
The
provisions of
a No protection
jelomous
,
common
carrier
from
loss
injury to goods
arising
any servant
acts has
in his
(b)
[1894]
Q^B.
373.
571.
The burden
Proof of
^''^*
parcel entrusted to a
common
carrier
in respect of
as
The
is
not concluded
paid by
him
(if any).
Carriers Act, 1830,
s.
9.
common
car- Railway
""'P""'"
as
such.
But
every
railway
company,
canal
Digitized
by Microsoft
256
LAW OF CONTRACT
to
its
powers,
afford
all
and delivering of
eral
traffic,
railways
it. C^)
and
canals
by
j
(a)
Palmer
Grand Junction Ry. Co. (1839) 4 M. & W. 749. Midland. Ry. Co. (1849) 4 Exch. 367. M'Manui V. Lana. &= Yorks. Ry. Co. (1859) 4 H. & N. 2,^^ Dickson V. G. N. Ry. Co. (1886) 18 Q. B. D., at pp. 184-185.
v.
Johnson
w.
(b)
Railway
and'
s.
z.
["TraflSc" here includes not only passengers and their luggage, and goods, animals, and other things conveyed by any railway company or canal company, or railway and canal company, but also carriages, waggons, t'rucksl, boats, and vehicles of every description, adapted for running or passing on tlie railway or canal of any such company (Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1854, s. i).]
Luggag.
in carriage
573.
as
When
its
a railway
company
such
professes
to act
common
luggage of pasto
sengers,
extends
personal
which he
travels
at p.
42.
Splecial
contract
(whether
as
common
carriers or otherwfise)(^)
Digitized
by Microsoft
CARRIAGE
for the loss of or for any injury
257
done
to
any animals
company
or
its
servants,
declaration, or
coriditions
by any
contract, unless
the
therein
contained with
respect
to
the
signed
carriage.('')
Diehon
[The burden of proving a condition to be just and reasonable falls on the company. Dickson v. G. iV.. Ry. Co., uhi sup., at p. 'i 8 The provisions of this do not apply to (per Lord Esher, M. R.).
a limitation of liability for loss occasioned otherwise than by the
company
felonious
Co,
or
its
apply
to
V.
loss
by the
ff^.'jRy.
acts
i
(Shaw
G.
v.
(Harrison
p. 114).]
L. B.
[1894]
C. Ry.
Q.
S.
Co.
575.
No
greater damages
may be
recovered from
Live animals
any such company for the loss of or for any injury done to any animals of the following classes beyond
the sums following
for
:
viz. for
any horse,
fifty
;
pounds
for
any neat
cattle,
pounds
any
the
unless
pany
has,
at
Digitized
by Microsoft
258
LAW OF CONTRACT
to
them
as
may
for
demand and
receive by
way of compensation,
upon the
Such excess must be paid in addition to the ordinary rate of charge, and must be notified
tioned.
in the
manner prescribed
in
567.
s.
7.
[The proof of the value of such animals or goods, and of the amount of the injury done thereto, lies in all cases upon the person
claiming compensation for such loss or injury
(/ifr/W.).]
Liabilifj as
576.
the
The
as
common
carrier
rights,
company
common
s.
7.
Carriage of
passengers
517.
for hire
A
is
person
who
as
bound
of such passengers
skill
and
care,
can render
skill
it,
and
in carrying
them
(*^
Digitized
by Microsoft
CARRIAGE
The same
principle
applies
to
259
the
carriage
of
in
goods by a person
the capacity of a
(a)
Redhead
(b)
v. Mid. JRy. Co. (1869) L. R. 4 Q. B. 379. Simson v. London General Omnibus Co. (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 390. East Indian Rail. Co. v. Kalides Mukerjee [1901] A. C. 396.
578.
person
who
Gratuitous
^"''""S^
liable
for
damage
to
reasonable care on
at p.
40.
579.
person
who
riage goods
which the
know
to
be
^'""^'
of a dangerous character,
character of the goods
is
bound,
if
the dangerous
not apparent, to
make
it
known
tO the person to
whom
do
so,
carriage.
If he
fails
to
he
is
answerable for
Farrant
v.
580. Except
.
the goods
is
provided by 566, the owner of ! Ill/not precluded from pursuing his remeas
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
a6o
dies
LAW OF CONTRACT
under the contract by reason of non-disclosure
the. carrier.
Crouch
Shatii V.
V.
Home (1828) Bingf. 217. L. &> N. W. Ry. Co. (1854) G. W. Ry. Co. [1894] i 0^8.
H C.
373.
3. 255.
Carrier's
[ien
581.
A carrier,
end
By agreement with
consignee, or by usage, he
may
also
him
for carriage.^
But the
fact that
he has a
lien
him
to retain
the goods
Skinner V.
Oppeifheim v. Russell (1802) 3 B. & P. 42. IJpshaw (1702) 2 Ld. Raym. 752.
Aspinnllv. PicJford {lioo) 3 B. & P. 44 n. (a) Rushfortb v. Hadjield (1806) 7 East, at pp. 229^230^ (c) Butler v. Woolcott (1805) 2 B. & P. N. R. 64. OppeSheim\. Russell (iSoz) 3 B. & P. 42. Wright V. Shell {1S22) 5 B. & Aid. 350,
(b)
Carriage
by water
582.
Any
vessel, exercises
hire,
Digitized
by Microsoft
CARRIAGE
to the contrary, the liabiHty
261
of a
common
carrier,
[But
{jsemble)
he
is
582a.
sell
carrier,
whether by land or
sea,
may
SaUtopre-
him
not
for carriage,
to
prevent
for
deterioration,
if
it
is
practically
possible
him
Sims
'to
obtain
instructions
from
the
M.
R. Co. [1913]
K. B. 103.
.
583. Theprovisionsof this Section, except 566569, apply both to carriage by land and to carriage by sea, but to carriage by sea only so far as they are
not inconsistent with the rules
Carriage
'""
of the
Law Mer-
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
VIII
PARTNERSHIP
Befriition
584. Partnership
is
the
relation
which
subsists
biysiness in
common
view of
profit.
The
i,
(i), 45.
"Firm"
585. Persons
who
with one another are in this Section called collectively a " firm "; and the name under which their
business
is
carried on
is
4. (i).
Existence of
par
tiers
tp
whole
parties.
Cox
V.
Companies
587.
The
pany
or,
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
[a) registered
as
263
panies Act,
liament for
relating
to
;
stock
companies
[^)
formed or incprporated by or
any
other
pursuance of
[c) a
Act of Parliament or Letters Patent, or Royal Chartei; or company engaged in working mines within
;
and subject
naries
is
to the jurisdiction
of the Stan-
Section.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
1
(2).
588. Joint
property,
tenancy,
tenancy in
common,
joint
Co-owner'^
!
common
profits
made by
s.
(1).
589.
The
ing such returns have or have not a joint or common right or interest in any property from which, or from the use of which, the returns are derived.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
2.
(z).
K3
Digitized
by Microsoft
464
Sharing of
profits
LAW OF CONTRACT
The
receipt
590.
profits
is
by a person of
is
a share
of the
of a business
a share, or of a
w^ith,
payment contingent
the' profits
a
make him
2 (3).
Payment of
debt out of
profits
591.
The
receipt
by
a person
of a debt or other
liquidated
amount by
of the accruing
itself
profits
make him^
as such.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
2 (3)
(a).
Remunera'"^
*t7trofit's
592.
^ agent of a person
engaged
in a business
by
a share
itself
make
(3) (b).
Widow
or
593.
deceased
a
person, being
partner,
child of deceased
receiving
profits
by
vi'^ay
of
annuity
partner
portion of the
made
vs^as
in the
business in
is
a partner,
not,
by
2 (3)
(c).
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
594.
a person
265
loan to
Lender of
^"^^'"^
The advance
of
money by way of
business,
on
a contract
from carry-
make
the
on the business, or
contract
all
is
in writing
(3) (d).
595.
person receiving, by
way of annuity
or
Vendor paid
""'
"J
P'''J"'
him of
the goodwill of
receipt,
the business,
a partner in
is
not,
(3) (e).
whom money
Postponement
way of
{ ^j"^'^j^
to
ordinary
of the business, being adjudged a bankrupt, entering into an arrangement to pay his creditors less than
twenty shillings
in the
pound, or dying
is
in insolvent
not entitled
Digitized
by Microsoft
266
to recover
seller
LAW OF CONTRACT
anything in respect of his loan, and the
is
of the goodwill
consideration
satisfied.
in
money
or money's
3.
Number of
partners
597.
persons
No
partnership consisting of
more than
is
ten
may be formed
registered as
company under the Companies Act, 1908, or is formed in pursuance of some other Act of Parliament, or of Letters Patent and no partnership consisting of more than twenty persons may be formed
;
its
members thereof, unless it is registered as a company under the Companies Act, 1908, or is formed in pursuance of some
other Act of Parliament or of Letters Patent, or
a
is
company engaged
in
[The Court of
exist; but
tain
its
jurisdiction
the Vice- Warden of the Stannaries has ceased to still survives, and is exercisable by cer-
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
598.
267
Any
may
be-
infants in
come
a partner.
minor avoiding
a contract
of
f""*^'"
*f
partnership in terms of
Book
I,
(*)
he remains
by him
as
applicable
firm.C')
in
of the
liabilities
of the
Corpe v. Overton (1833) 10 JBing. 252. Hamilton v. Vaughan Sherrin Electrical Co, [1894] (b) Lovelly. Beauchamp [1894] A. C, at p. 611.
(a)
Ch, 589.
1
599.
is
to
statute of
'^''"
to continue in
'
falls
(Book
II,
within 4 of the Statute of Frauds Part I, 22o).W But the fact that a
is
partnership
formed
in
relation
to
it
or
for
the
acquisition of land
does not
bring
v^ithin the
statute.^
(a)
Williams
v.
Jones (1826)
B.
&
L. 108.
Forster v. Hale
Dale
(b) Essex
V. V.
(1800) 5 Ves. 308. Hamilton (1846) 5 Ha. 369. Essex (1855) 20 Beav. 449.
[An agreement
sists
which constatute, if
of interests in land, is probably within the it contemplates the assignment of the partnership assets. Smith (1889) 43 Ch. D. 208.)]
partly
{Gray
v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
268
Authority tf
LAW OF CONTRACT
Evcry partner
is
600.
j^-^
farners
who
busi-
way
with, whom he
is
dealing either
knows
he has
to
be
s.
5.
;
be superfluous
but
it
occurs in
is
or
is
way
on by the
ness
ppon the nature of the and the practice of persons engaged in it.
firm, depends
Mara v. Browne [i8g6] i Ch. 199. Lindley, Partnership (7th ed.) p. 148.
ad)
Exercise of
authority
602.
An
and done or executed in the firmname, or in any other rnariner showing an intention to bind the firm, by any person thereto authorised,
ness of the firm,
whether a partner or not, is (if otherwise regular) binding on the firm and all the partners.
Partnership Act,
1
890,
s.
6.
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
603.
269
Partner act'If/l'jIJjj
Where one
with
is
the firm's ordinary course of business, the firm not bound, unless he
is
;
any personal
partner.
liability
by an
s.
individual
7.
604. If
it
Partiter act-
that any restriction shall be r power of placed on the r J any one or more of them to bind the firm, no act
*"p"^'fi<""^ of agreement
done
in contravention of the
agreement
is
binding on
agreement.
Partnership Act,
1
890,
s.
8.
is
liable, jointly
with
of
Liability of
debts
is
and. obligations
;
debt^rffirm
a partner
and, after
due
remain
,of his
1
to the prior
payment
separate debts.
890,
s.
Partnership Act,
9.
of his estate.
till
not delivered
after the
lie
goods are ordered before, but action for goods sold and against the representatives of the deceased
E.g.^
if
death, an
partner (Bagel
v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
270
Liability of
LAW OF CONTRACT
of partner
s^y partner acting in the ordinary course or the business of the firm, or with the authority of his
co-partriers, loss or injury
is
...
is
firm
liable
therefor to
the same
10.
Misapplication
ter ty
namely
the scope
of propof third
where one
partner,
acting within
parties by
money
partner
and
a firm
in
(^)
where
the course
of
its
business
receives
money or proper-ty of a third person, and the money or property so received is misapplied by one or more of the partners
while
it is
in the custody
of the firm
the
1 1
the firm
is
liable to
make good
1
loss.
Partnership Act,
890,
s.
Liability in
tort joint
is
liable, jointly
and
several
is
a partner
last
s.
therein,
which becomes
preceding .
I
890,
z.
Book
[For the consequences of joint liability, see 361-366 (^ante. II, Part I). But there is no right, of contribution ( 365) amongst joint tort-feasors. See poit^ Book II, Part III.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
ploys
trust
271
Breach of
^l^lnll
the
business
or
on
is
the
liable
the
trust
property to the
;
persons
beneficially
interested therein
(tf)
except that
this
having notice of
breach of
(^)
trust
and
this prevents trust
nothing in
money from
if still
possession or under
its
control.
s.
13.
\E. g.^ a partner with whose knowledge trust moneys are employed in the business of the firm remains .liable in respect
thereof, even after retirement
has received a [gratuitous] discharge from the trustees. Patrick [1901J A. C. 282.)]
who knowingly
a partner in a
"'
himself to be represented,
is
as
particular firm,
has,
liable as a partner to
any one
who
on the
faith
made
communicated
to the per-
making the
is
representation or
after a partner's
to be
made.
But where,
continued in the
Digitized
by Microsoft
272
LAW OF CONTRACT
as
make
or
effects,
liable
for
any
partnership
debts
14.
Representa-
611.
An
admission or representation
'
,
made by any /
.
affairs,
and in
^^
to
ordinary course of
its
btsiness
(other
than a
own
authority
is
15.
Notice
to
who
habitually acts
to
partner
'notice to
firm
partnership
affairs,
operates
16.
Liability
ef
613.
person
who
is
admitted
'
as a partner into
incoming
partner
^^ existing firm does not thereby become liable to the creditors of the firm for anything done before
_
he became
a partner.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
17 (l).
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
614.
273
a firm does not
Liability of
partner
who
retires
from
''^''""^ retiring
partner
17 (2).
615.
retiring partner
liabilities,
maybe
discharged from
Release of
^^'/[^^f
any
existing
by an agreement to that
between himself and the members of the firm as newly constituted and the creditors; and this agreement may be either express, or inferred as a
effect
fact tors
from the course of dealing between the and the firm as newly constituted.
Partnership Act, i8go,
s.
credi-
17 (3).
616.
Effect of
partners on
S'""''""^^
to
future
transactions
by
any change
in the constitution
18.
617.
The
Variation of
'^
whether ascertained by agreement or defined by this Section, may be varied by the consent of all the
^"erms"
Digitized
by Microsoft
274
partners;
LAW OF CONTRACT
and such consent may be either express or
inferred
from
a course
of dealing.
s.
19.
[Observe that the operation of this is confined to mutual rights and duties. It does not, of course, apply to dealings with
third parties.]
Partnership
property
618. All
property,
property,
interests
in
originally
Stock, or acquired,
wise,
and
part-
nership, and
accordance with
the
partnership
agreement.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
20 (l).
Partnership
gjg^
j'jjg
igg^j
estate
or
interest
in
any land
which belongs
rules
as necessary*), for
20 (z).
is
[The
precise
not apparent
but
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
620.
275
Where co-owners of an
itself
made by
be used
so purchased
belongs to
not
the
date
of the
purcliase,
in
the
land
first
mentioned.
Partnership Act, i8go,
s.
20 (3).
Property
'^^,
00
to the firm
is
deemed
partnership
T'^
to
funds
zi.
[And
will not
V.
it
name (Wray
Wray [1905]
622.
Where an
become
.
part.
Partnership
land personal
estate
nership property,
it
is,
between the
and
his
zz.
'
'
in,
Book
V., Sect.
XVI,
Digitized
by Microsoft
276
Execution
against partnership prop-
LAW OF CONTRACT
A writ of execution will
not issue against any
.
623.
judgment
against
V^irtner*'
^^
^"^ ^^ Court may, on the application by summons of any judgment creditor of a partner,
^'^"^-
make an
the
with payment of
debt
amount
of
the judgment
and
interest
thercion,
to
him
in re-
directions
which might have been directed or given if the charge had been made in favour of the judgment creditor by the partner, or which the circumstances
of the case
may
require.
s.
23 (i)
(2).-
'
Redemption
by other
as is
described
or are at
partners
is
or, in case
same.
Partnership Act, i8go,
23 (3).
Rights of partners
inter se
625o
The
interests
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
ment
277
the partnership, are determined, subject to any agreeexpress or implied between the partners, by
:
in the capital
and
profits
or
otherwise, sustained
The
respect of payments
bilities
(()
incurred by
in
personal
lia-
the
ordinary and
proper conduct
;
or,
entitled to interest at
annum from
partner
is
ment of
profits,
on the
capital
subscribed by him.
(5)
business.
No
partner
is
entitled to
remuneration
for
Digitized
by Microsoft
278
(7)
LAW OF CONTRACT
No
Any
person
may
be introduced
all
as
a partner
existing partners.
may
of the
partners
may be made
in the nature
The
kept at the
24.
Expulsion of
partner
626.
No
partner unless a
power
to
25.
Determina;
627.
Where no
:
fixed
tion
of
partnership
may
the other
origi-
nally
in writing,
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
signed by the partner giving
purpose.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
279
sufficient for this
it, is
26.
628.
Where
Prolongation
'''""' "fp" "'^
ship
term,
is
new agreement,
same
they were
consistent
with
of a
'
partnership at will.
A
or
continuance
of the
business
by
the
partners,
such of them
during the
presumed
to be a continuance
of the partnership.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
27.
Accounts and
'"j"'""""'"
and
full
information of
all
890,
s,
28.
Separate
^p'^^'neri
any benefit derived by him, without the consent of the other partners, from any transaction concerning
the partnership, or from any use by
him of
the
also
to
transactions
undertaken
Digitized
by Microsoft
28o
LAW OF CONTRACT
been dissolved by the death
affairs
29.
[" either
words
relate to
Presumably by any surviving partner," etc. "undertaken" and not to "wound up."]
these
Profits of
consent of the
competing
business
nature
as,
made by him
in that business.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
30.
Q22t,
An
entitled to
m
.
the
way
ot
act as partner
as against
management
or
administration
of the partnership
otherwise be entitled
31
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
633.
281
Accohnt on
whether
entitled to receive
to
assets
which the
entitled as
31 (2).
Expiry of
'^
is
dissolved
partnership "^
tion of that
(b) if
term
or undertaking;
(c) if
mentioned
is
dis-
from the date mentioned in the notice as the date of dissolution, or, if ho date is so mentioned, as from the date of the communication of the notice.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
32.
635.
ners,
Dissolution
every partnership
dissolved, as
regards
all
iankruptcy
Digitized
by Microsoft
282
LAW OF CONTRACT
partners,
the
partner.
33 ( I
).
Dissolution
636.
A partnership
may,
at the
o/shlrf
partners, be dissolved if
any partner
33 (z).
Dissolution
637.
A
for
partnership
is
by
un-
iy illegality
the happening
lavi^ful
members of the
Partnership Act, 1890,
firm to carry
it
on
s.
34.
[E.g.
by one
Stevenson quences.]
of the parl;ners becoming an alien enemy. See Sons v. Aktiengesellschafi [191^] A. C. 239, for conse'
Dissolution
by decree for
638.
On
application
by
may
following cases
Lunacy
(a)
when
or
to
a partner
is
is
shown
may be made
com-
(b)
when
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
nership contract
(c)
283
when
in the
calculated to affect
;
when
of
wilfully or persistently
commits
a breach
of
"^r^momlati-
is
not reasonably
on the business
in partnership
with
him;
(e)
when
Loss on
be carried on
(f)
working
whenever
arisen
in
any
case .circumstances
have
Other dr'^'*'"'
"""'
render
just
nership be dissolved.
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
35.
639.
Where
its
Retiring
change in
apparent
constitution,
he
i?
members of
firm
the old
until
firm as
still
being
^'"^^'^
members of the
change.
An
by
a firm
whose
Digitized
by Microsoft
284
LAW OF CONTRACT
is
England or Wales,
notice to persons
who had
not
dealings with the firm before the date of the dissolution or change so advertised/^) but not [semble)
to persons
who
(a)
dealt
actually
knew of it.C")
Partnership Act, 1890,
s.
i
36 (l)
(2).
(b)
Peake, 208.
Exemption
640.
The
estate
of
a partner
who
dies,
or
who
to
becomes bankrupt, or of
be a partner,
retires
a partner
from the
firm,
partnership debts
36
(3).
Notice of
641 .
On
^
retirement
ment
may
publicly notiiy
may
necessary or
proper
acts, if
any,
Winding-up
lution
may
be
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
necessary to
285
wind up the
affairs
of the partnership,
at
and
to
the time of
38.
643.
The
firm
is
in
acts
Liability for
but this parmer proviso does not affect the liability of any person
;
of a partner
who
has
become bankrupt
who
of the bankrupt.
Partnership Act, 1890-,
s.
38.
644.
partner
On
is
the dissolution
of a
.
partnership every
.
Distribution
of assets on
dissolution
persons
claiming through
them
have the
to
have the
payment applied
in
payment
as part-
of what
after
39.
Digitized
/
by Microsoft
286
Return of
LAW OF CONTRACT
Where one
partner has paid a
645.
premium
before
to
premium
dissolved
the
of
a partner,
the Court
may
thinks
which
the dissolution
is,
wholly or
chiefly,
the partner
who
40.
Rights of
innocent
646.
Where
a partnership contract
is
rescinded on
partner on
as-
sets, after
for
made by him
in respect
of the partnership
liabilities
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
(c) to
287
fraud or
all
making the
representation, against
liabilities
s.
of the firm.
41.
647.
1
Otherwise ceased to
11be
as
Interest on
capital of
a partner,
11 and the
surviving
outgoing
P"''*"^''
firm with
its
capital or assets,
without any
final settle-
ment of accounts
going partner or
or his estate
of himself or
made
may
find to be
annum on
ship
assets.
the
amount of
partner-
s.
42
(i).
648.
is
Where by
Purchase of
p^fi*"f,^ ;.
^^rest
is
may
be,
is
Digitized
by Microsoft
2&8
LAW; OF CONTRACT
iri,
exprciae:
not in
all
material respects
is
thereof, he
liable to
PE^rjtnej-ship
account under
Act, 1890,
s.'
647.
42
(2).
Purchase.monefa. debt
649.
<
Subject to any agreement between the partr amount due irom surviving or continuing
1
ners, the
is
43.
Accounts on
dissolution
650.
^
;
,'
j.l
.,;
(.
,,
lollowing rules
:
tal,
capital,
and
lastly, if
necessary,
by the partners
which they
were entitled
(b)
to share profits.
The
assets
make up
losEips
liabilities
of the
who
Digitized
by Microsoft
PARTNERSHIP
2.
289
partner
rateably
to
In
paying
to
each
what
capital
3.
is
him
from
for advances
distinguished
In paying to
is
^acjfci
pajrtner rateably
to
what
in
him
respect of capital
4.
The ultimate residue, if any, is divided among the partners, in the proportion
in
which
Partnership Act,
890,
s.
44.
651.
The
sale
Sale of
business, either to
to
^' ^'
chasers.W
of special agreement)
they resort to
(a) (b)
may do
them
him without
solicitation.^')
Churtonv. Doug/as (18 ^g) Johns. 174. Trego V. Hunt .pi 8g6] A. C. 7. Gi//ig/bam'V. Biddtw [1900] i Ch. 685. Curl Bros. v. Webster [1904] I Ch. 685.
Ill,
Sect.
XIII,
Tit.
VI,
1676 1680.]
L 2
Digitized
by Microsoft
hti^'M/t^TH/.M
'.hi
'H'Vtv:
.(1,7,
SECTION IX
rl
ill
fffui
iTj
GUARANTEE
\
Defifiition
652.
contract
of
guarantee
")
IS
contract
promises
an-
making
'
to be incurred
Hargreavcs
(1844) 13 M.
Ch.,
at p. '99.
& W.,
-aot..
at p.
570,
In re Hoyle [185.3]
&Dna;^'-
atu
ion
ofit;
Must
debtor
be a
653.
It is
essential
to
the^ contract
of guarantee
principal
of a
principal
debtor
(^)
but the
primary
future
liability'
may be
or contingent,
(a)
(b)
Birkmyry, Z)ar<?// (1705) I Salk. 27. Goodman v. Chase "(iSig) i B. & Aid. 297. Lakeman v. Mountstephen (1874) L- ^' 7 ^- L./at .Rew(?// V. Moseley (1822) 3 BVod. & B. 211. Molktv. Batman (1865) L. R. I C. P. 163.
p. 24.
[A contract of guarantee must be distinguished from a contract of indemnity,, which is a contract to save another harmless, independently of the question whether a third person makes default or
not {Guild V.
hard to
tell
in a given case
Digitized
by Microsoft
GUARANTEE
291
In the former event, the liability of the promisor is is intended. primary and independent ; in the second, it is merely subsidiary and collateral, attaching only in the event of the default of the principal debtor. A contract may appear to be a guarantee and yet be an indemnity, as where a person purports to guarantee an infant's debt for goods, not being necessaries. Since the infant incurs no primary liability, the other party renders himself liable, not as surety but as principal {Harris v. Huntback {i"JSl) ^ Burr. 373,
per Foster, J.).]
654.
antee
is
When
to
Statute of
of another, the contract must (subject to 655) comply with the requirements of 220, Book II, Part I
but
when
it
is
merely incidental
to
a transaction
Martin [1902]
K. B. 778.
[For instances of guarantees not falling within the Statute of Frauds ( 220 supra) see the remarks of Vaughan Williams, L. J.,
in the case last cited, at p. 786.]
655.
Considera
tion
but
it is
not neces-
writing.^
(a)
French
v.
French (1841) 2
M. & G.
644.
s.
(b)
Mercantile
Law Amendment
Act, i8j6,
3,
656.
contract of guarantee
may
apply either
Single
and
guar"an"fes
Digitized
by Microsoft
292
LAW OF CONTRACT
latter case, either
for a
Whether
a guarantee
is
single
or
continuing
is
which
it
was made.
Meadows (1869) L. R. 4 C. P. 595. Morrelly. Cowan (1877) 7 Ch. D. 151. Lloyd's V. Harper (1880) 16 Ch. D., at p. 303. And see Merle v. Wells (1810) 2 Camp. 413.
Heffieldv.
Uberrima
Q57.
The
Surety
is
entitled to be .truly
informed
of the
creditor
real nature
which
he promises
his
is
misrepresented
concealed from,
guarantee
Pideoci
is
void.
v.
Bjshop (1825) 3 B.
&
C. 605.
_:
& F. 934. Hamilton \. Watson (1845) 12 CI. & F. 109. Lee v. Jones (1863) 14 C. B. N. S. 386 ; 17 C. B. N.
Railton v.
Mathews (1844) 1
^1.
S.
482.
Subsequent
dealings
if
,
guaraintee,
Sanderson
v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
GUARANTEE
659.
293
last
Except
as
provided by the
is
two , no
creditor.
Disclosure
cast
upon the
North British Insurance Co. v. Lloyd (1854) 'o Exch. 523. Lee V. Jones (1863) 14 C. B. N. S. 386 ; 17 C. B. N. S. 482. Hamilton v. Watson (1845) 12 CI. & F. 109. Davies v. London Marine Insurance Co. (1878) 8 Ch. D., at p. 475.
660.
Qti
A
at
Revocation
'^ S'^'roitee
revoked
any time
as
given.
Offord^. Davies (1862) iz C. B. N. S. 748. Harper (1880) 16 Ch. D. 290. In re Grace [1902] i Ch. 733.
[At
semble.,
common law
this
a specialty
exists
but,
rule
no longer
J., In re Grace., at
P-
738)-]
661.
The
is
deterless,
Liability of
mined by the contract of guarantee. but cannot be more than that of the
Ex parte Young (1881)
may be
surety
principal debtor.
662.
in
When
it
amount,
Limited
^'^"''""'^^
the guarantee
Digitized
by Microsoft
294
principal
LAW OF CONTRACT
debt,
or
limited liability.
Ellis V.
Emanuel (1876)
Ex. D. 157.
" up to ;'iooo " a debt of ;^5000 owing to B by C, then, so long as 1000 of that debt remains owing to B, A will be liable to pay ;'iooo. But if A guarantees to B " a thousand pounds of the ;^5000 owing To B by C," then, if, in C's bankruptcy, B receives a dividend of 2y_ in the , A will be entitled to credit for zj- in the pound on a thousand pounds, ;. e. for ;^ioo {Hobson v. Bass (1871) L. R. 6 Ch. App., at p. 794).]
[. ^.,
if
guarantees to
Default of
principal
debtor
663.
becomes
a
it
primary
is
liability.
Walton
v.
Price V.
Indemnity
of surety
664.
The
surety
is
entitled to
be indemnified by
all liability
and
loss in-
by him under the contract of guarantee, in consequence of the principal debtor's default.
curred
Such
surety
loss
sum which
to
the
upon
pay to the
creditor.
(a)
Badeley
(b)
Toussaint V. Martinnatit (1787) 2 T, R. 100. v. Consolidated Bank (1886) 34 Ch. D., at p. 556. Ex parte Bishop (1880) 15 Ch. D., at p. 421.
Digitized
by Microsoft
GUARANTEE
665.
295
The
surety
the when
claimable
and before
to the creditor/'')
indemnity
before
for the
(a)
is
accrues due,
so
make
amount
v.
v.
paid.W
at p.
Cruse
Lacey
Johnson
(b)
(c)
v.
V.
Hoiis
Paine (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 641. Salvage Association (1887) 19 Q. B. D., Hill (187^) L. R. 18 Eq., at p. 191. fTayet (1887) 36 Ch. D. 256.
is
460.
(d)
5
voluntary
(^Sleigh v.
Sleigh
(i8;o)
Exch. 514).
666.
Upon
Remedies of
'"'^"^
to exonerate
him from
liability, or [b)
himself pay
amount
paid.
Antrobus v. Davidson (1817) 3 Mer., at p. 579. Davies v. Humphreys (1840) 6 M. & W. 153. Wooldridge v. Norris (1868) L. R. 6 Eq. 410. Green v. fFynn (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. App., at p. 207. Bechervaise v. Lewis (1872) L. R. 7 C. P., at p. 377.
[The
nature of this equitable remedy does not clearly appear Apparently the surety should make the creditor
a party to his action ; and the court will then order payment to the Semble, the by the principal debtor of the amount due.
has not satisfied the creditor's claim, cannot insist on {Lacey v. Hill (1874) L. R. 18 Eq. 182; surety may sue Wolmershausen v. Gullick [1893] 2 Ch. 514.) this toties quoties he makes a payment on account of the under
surety,
who
payment
to himself.
L3
Digitized
by Microsoft
296
Subrogation
LAW OF CONTRACT
The
surety
667.
entitled to
have
him
and to stand
all
and to use
the cred-
the
name of the
whole
or in a just pro-
Law Amendment
Act, 1856,
s.
3.
at p.
377.
Set-off
668.
The
surety yvho
is
may
claim.
Murphy
v.
Glass
(1869) L. R.
2 P.
C. 408.
Contribution
by co-sureties
669.
,.,.,.
Where
liability as
eral,
..
and whether
arises
contract,(*)
and whenever
was
arose,
of the
not,('')
co-suretyshijp
his proportion
may
claim
contribution
from
his co-sureties
(and
Digitized
by Microsoft
GUARANTEE
from the
(a)
297
portionate to the
Deering
V.
amount
for
which each
i
is
surety. ("*)
Cox, 318.
(b)
(c)
Gifford (1802) 6 Ves., at p. 808. Whitings. Burke (1870) L. R. 10 Eq. 539; 6 Ch. App. 342. Davies v. Humphreys (1840) 6 M. & W., at p. 168.
Ex parte
(d)
Batardv. Hawes (1853) 2 E. & B. 287. Ellesmere Brewery Co. v. Cooper [1896] i Q. B. 75.
as contribu-
Only solvent
co-sureties
tion,
account
is
as are reckoned
may be com-
Exoneration
money
actually paid.
17 Ch. D. 44.
toties quoties
payment on account,
is
Humphreys (1840) 6
M. & W.
672.
A surety who
is
is
entitled to contribution
from
Share of
securities
a co-surety
security held
by such co-surety
in respect
of the
guaranteed debt, whatever was the date at which such security was given, and whether such surety knew
Digitized
by Microsoft
298
or did not
LAW OF CONTRACT
know of
its
existence
when he gave
his
guarantee.
Steely. Dixon (1881) 17 Ch. D., at p. 832. Duncan, Fox i^ Co. v. N. 5" S. Wales Bank (1880) L. R. 6 App.
Ca.
I.
Discharge of suretybyexUnction of
'^^^'
IS
.... discharged
-.
itor
debt
extinguished.
V.
Moss
Hall (1850)
Exch.,
at p.
Discharge by
indulgence
74. Subject
as aforesaid,
. 1
the surety
is
discharged
i-
.11
if
debtor to give
him time
for
payment,W
sue.W or
is
security
Howelly. Jones (1834) i Cr. M. & R., at p. 107. Szeire V. Redman (1876) i Q. B. D., at p. 541. PoM V. Everett (1876) i Q. B. D. 669. Clarke V. Birley (1889) 41 Ch. D. 422. (b) Strong v. /"w/^r (1855) 17 C. B., at p. 215. (c) Goring v. Edmonds (1829) 6 Bing. 94. (d) Twopenny v. Toung (1824) 3 B. & C. 208. Bells. Banks (1841) 3 M. & G. 258.
(a)
Unless rights
675.
Creditor
who makes
-
reserved
composition with, ^
Digitized
by Microsoft
GUARANTEE
the surety.
299
incidental rights,
Cole
(1846) 16 M.
& W,
iz8.
L. C. 997. Boaler V. Mayor (1865) 19 C. B. N. S. 76. Green v. Wynn (1869!) L. R. 4 Ch. App. 204.
V.
Owen
Homan (1853) 4 H.
such reservation can be made upon a release of a principal two things being inconsistent (Kearsley v. Cole (ubi sup.), at p. 136, per Parke, B.). But where there is such reservation, the so-called release will sometimes be construed as a covenant not to sue {Green v. Wynn,
debtor, the
ubi sup., at p. 206).]
[No
676.
The
surety
his
is
disicharged
by any
variation. Discharge
iy
made without
unless
it is
consent,
of the
liability
of the
unsub-
""""'''"'
stantial, or
surety.
Holme
Taylor
Bolton
V.
v.
V.
Brunskill (1877) 3 Q. B. D., at p. 505. Bank of N. S. Wales (188.6) L. R. 1 1 App, Ca. 596 (P. Salmon [1891] 2 Ch. 48.
C).
677.
The
surety
is
Discharge by
any act
in connection
with the
liability
with his rights, or if the creditor omits to perform any duty and, by such omission, injury is caused to
the surety.
Dawson
Watts
v.
V.
Durham
Lawes (1854) 23 L. ]. Gh. 434. Shuttleworth (i86i) 7 H. & N. 353. v. Fowler (1889) 22 Q. B. D., at pp. 405 and 419.
Digitized
by Microsoft
300
Abandonsecurity iy
.
LAW OF CONTRACT
fails
gently
he allows
creditor
'
.--t
;
Pearl
Deacon (1857) 24-Reavj 186, Wulffy. Jay (1872) L. R. 7 Q. B. 756. Ta-jlor V. Bank, of N. S. Wales (1886)
w.
L.
R.
1 1
^pp. Ca.,
at
p;6o3
(P. co."'\:;-;
;";;;''^
..,,..'"'''"'
[Where the surety is personally discharged, any property which may have given as security to the creditor is discharged, also. {Bolton V. &/ [1891} 2 Ch. 48).]
he
Death df
surety
679.
soon
as
whole of the consideration moving from the creditor has been wholly performed before such
unless the
But the
Coulthart
v.
(P^''
Bowen,
J.).
And
(b)
see
In re Silvester [1895]
Beckett- v.
Addyman
'
Change of
partnership
is
680.
Where
Digitized
by Microsoft
GUARANTEE
681.
301
Rekase of "'''"'"y
When
more
and
sureties
who
(b)
Mercantile Bank of Sydney v. Taylor [1893] A. C. 317. Ward V. National Bank of New Zealand (1883) L. R. 8 App.
Ca. 755l^Semble, in
released co-surety
Bankruptcy
of principal
debtor
19 14,
does
28
(4).
683.
The
surety
may prove
in the
bankruptcy of
Proof by
^"^nkiuttc
Digitized
by Microsoft
302
Indemnity
LAW OF CONTRACT
When
;ipi
684,
J or
cos s
he cannot,
principal
the.
debtor,
contribution
from
co-
defence, unless in
as a
reasonable and
own
case.
,,;
,:^,^^,s
-v
'
'^
Roach Beech
Thompson (1830) Moo. & M. 487. 5 C. B. 696. Broom y.' Hall ( i S'sg)' 7 C. B.' N. S. 503.
V. v.
Jones (184.8)
"''
!''>-:>
Hammoniy.
Biissiy (i'8'87)
zo'
Q. B: D. 79.
!'
Third-party
procee
685.
y_^^,
When
an action
is
mgs
^^
whom
he has a ckim
party.
R.
'^'^
to
^Ai
'S. C, 1883, Ord. XVI.' rr. 48-55. Ex parte Young (1881) 17 Ch. D., at p. 670
/'
\)oV'i.
i'.L
.':.>J(
;;.-(.>l(tf;'i
)(!]
fli
mvohj
vi.;'.'
vr<:'
."Jilt
\-;
i'Mcf'i
^ih
i\.\n:?.
oj
n';(|ij
b3J[B'.j
f!-;jii
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION X
INSURANCE
686.
contract
of
insurance
is
contract
Definition
agrees
of, a
with
pay-
ment
(
or series of payments
693)
it
sum
the
is
or
death or
which
contemplated will or
may
cause loss or
expense to the insured or such nominee (" interest or " insurable interest "),
687. Except
Part
I),
provided by 226 [ante. Book II, no special form is required for the contract
as
^'"'
But the
name
or
interested
(?
must be
insurance W
other than
and certain
assurances
of
money
)
payable
on the
assurance
company
C")
and
all
contracts of
Digitized
by Microsoft
304
the
LAW OF CONTRACT
making thereof
w.
Assurance Act, 1774,
s. 2.
220
(a) Life
Manns' Insurance Act, igo6, s. 23. (In the case of insurances affected by this Act, the contract must take thft form of a policy (s. 22).) (b) Collecting Societies and Industrial Assurance Companies Act, 1896, s. 13 (2). Atkinson v. Atkinson (1895) W. N. 114.
(c) Statute'
of Frauds (1677)'^
all
s.
4.
[In practice
form
called
a "policy."
contracts of insurance are contained in a written By the Stamp Act, 1891, s. 100, every
who receives a 'premium, or pays or allows money on any insurance, other than a sea Insurance, except under a policy duly
person
stamped, incurs a fine of 10. There is an exemption of policies issued by a registered Friendly Society (Friendly Societies Act,
1896,8.33.)]
'
Necessity for
688.
A contract of insurance
is
insurable
interest
interest in
Kymer
(1830) 10 B.
&
5 C. 724.
s.
;,
[But it may be treated as valid for ascertaining the rights of third persons (Worthington v. Curtis (1875) "i Ch. D. 419 A.-G. v. Murray [1904] I K. B. 165). And there is an exception in the case' of a
;
Industrial Assurance
3,6).]
But:
(a) in
"
"
\'
\,,^
life
insurance,
it is
time of the making of the contract, though it may afterwards cease to exist in vi^hole or in
Da/iy V. Intiia &^ London Life Assurance Co. (1854) 'S C. B. 36c. Latav. London Indisputable L. I. Co. (1855) i K. & j. 223.
of
a contract
of marine insurance,
Digitized
by Microsoft
INSURANCE
it is
305
time
of the
s.
6.
fire
insurance, and
must
exist
both
Sadler's Co.
[The strictness of this rule appears to make the benefit of such insurances unassignable without the consent of the insurer. Policies
of life and marine insurance were expressly made assignable at law by the Policies of Assurance Acts, 1867 and 1868 respectively, and policies of marine insurance by the Marine Insurance Act, 1906,
s.
so.]
it is
the duty
Duty ofdu-
of the insured
time
facts
of the making
of the contract
all
material
judgment of the
London Assurance
cited.
v.
"
^^- ^- 3^3>
^'^^
^^^^^ therein
Seaton v. Heath [1899] I Q. B. 782. Marine Insurance Act, 1906, ss. 17, 18.
690.
The
indemnity
the insurer
more than
sum
sufficient to
;
indemnify
but in the
him
endow-
Digitized
by Microsoft
306
LAW OF CONTRACT
policies) the
may be
Marine Insurance Act, 1906, s. 67. Dalby v. India y London Life Assurance Co. (1854) 15 C. B. 365. Law V. London Indisputable L. I. Co. (1855) i K. & J. 223. Hebdon y. West (1863) 3 B. & S, 579.
is
a detinite
sum of money,
where a
creditor insures
life of his debtor (^Hebdon v. IVest, ubi sup.) the Courts would probably never attertipt to estimate the value of the loss caused by death. But, in marine insurance, the insured can only recover such proportion of his loss, as represents the ratio of 'the value (actual or As to the agreed) of the property to the amount of the policy. uninsured balance, he is deemed to be his own insurer (Marine Insurance Act, 1906, s. 81).]
Rebuilding
after fire
fire
insurance on a building,
when
may, and, on
money
to
be expended in
83.
Re
Subrogation
^92.
An
insurer
who
is
has paid
money under
contract of insurance
purpose of
recovering the
sum
so paid,
remedies, rights of
and
as to. recover
all
might
Digitized
by Microsoft
INSURANCE
same
loss.
B. D., at p. 388.
v. Isaacs
307
[1897]
Q. B. 226.
[But the insurer cannot recover mere gratuities or benevolences received by the insured without claim of right (Burnand v. Rodocanachi (1882) L, R. 7 App. Ca. 333).]
693.
man
Matrimonial
on
his
own
and expressed
of his wife, or of
his children, or
woman on
her
own
life,
form
part
of the
estate
to his
or her debts.
But
if it is
with intent to
the policy, a
sum
equal to
Married
Women's
1.
insurance of
children
lives
Digitized
by Microsoft
3o8
LAW OF CONTRACT
13.
Nature of
insurable
interest
695. Subject to 693, 694, no man is presumed, by the mere fact of the relationship, to have
an interest in the
or creditor
;
life
of his child,
''^
brother, sister,
C")
life
of her husband,
and
vice versa,
man
^^
<s)
or
woman
that of
and (prein.
parent.
Every person
is
deemed
<'')
to
have an
own
life.
Halfprd
v.
Kymer (1830) 10 B.
,,
&
C. 724.
tion in the
1896).
(b)
Barnes
v.
Q. B. 864.
(In
was proved.)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Hebdon v. West (1863) 3 B. & S. 579. Reedy, Royal Exchange Co. (1796) 2 Peake (Add. Ca.) 70. Griffiths v. Fleming [1909] I K. B. 805.
Godsall V. Boldero (1807) 9 East, 72. Shilling V. Accidental Co. (1857) 2 H. N. 42. Horse V. Pearl Assurance Co. [J904] I K. B. 558.
(g)
&
[There
is
and Indusiyial
(h)
It
a slight modification of this rule in the case of Collecting Societies (Assurance Companies Act, 1909, s. 36).]
difficult
might be
to
find
however, assumed
express authority for the elementary in the great majority of the life
insurancecases that
come
Wagering
policies
made by way of
void.
gaming
or wagering (Section
XI) are
"
s.
(i).
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION XI
GAMING AND WAGERING
697. All contracts by way of gaming or wagering
Wagering
are null and void, and, subject to 698-700, and ""Ij""' no action may be brought or maintained for 704,
recovering any
to
sum of money or valuable thing alleged be won upon any wager, or which shall have been
18.
[The Courts have, with their habitual caution, shrunk from attempting an exhaustive definition of the qualities of "gaming" or " wagering," though there have been judicial observations on the point. (See remarks of Hawkins, J., in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke
Q. B., at p. 492; and of Herschell, L. C, [1895] A. C, at p. 323.) It would seem that the notion of a " sport " or " pastime " as well as that of a "bet" (Lockwood v. Cooper [1903] 2 K. B. 428) is an essential element in the first term, while in the second the idea of a " bet " But this distinction, though it may emphasize is alone involved. the difference between an appeal to skill and an appeal to pure chance, does not solve the difficulty. Perhaps the essence of a
in
gaming contract is, that the rights of the parties are made to depend upon an event which, though it may be the result of the exercise of skill, would not, in the natural order of things, produce economic gain or loss to the parties reasonably commensurate with
If it would, the contract is one of legitiIn a wagering contract, the parties stand to gain mate insurance. or lose upon an event or fact which it is presumably beyond their
Digitized
by Microsoft
3IO
power
LAW OF CONTRACT
to influence or affect,
in the
though it may not be a matter of ordinary acceptation of the term. E.g.yZ bet upon the shape of the earth is a " wager." Ed.]
"chance"
Recovery of
stakeholder
698. Notwithstanding 697, a party to a wager who has deposited a sum of money or valuable
thing with a stakeholder, to abide the event of a
wager,
unless
is
money
or thing,
it
pay
it
over.
Hampden
Burge
V.
v.
O' Sullivan
Walsh (1876) I Q. B. D. 189. Thomas [iSgs^ ' Q- ^- 698. yishley [ 1 900] i Q. B. 744.
V.
Recovery of
other party
699.
When money
it
is
wager,
may be
Strachan
his
own
Cover"
700. Securities
deposited
as
"cover" by one
Digitized
by Microsoft
311
Securities so
unless
instruments
a
and
have
been
taken
without notice by
bona fide
purchaser. (^)
Universal Stock Exchange y. Strachan [1896] A. C. 166. Strachan v. Universal Stock Exchange [1895] 2 Q. B., at p. 329, (per Lord Esher, M. R.).
(a)
(b)
701.
Subscription
"
f"^"
sum of money,
is
to be
awarded
to the
winner
game
or sport, pastime, or
84$,
s.
8.
[This does not exclude from the operation of 697 a case in which the parties to the wager are themselves the contributors, e.g. an agreement to walk a match for ;^200 a side {Trimble v. Hill (1880) L. R. 5 App. Ca. 342; Diggle v. Higgs (1877) 2 Ex. D. 422; Lockwoodv. Cooper [1903] 2 K. B. 428). "Lawful game" means any game not unlawful by statute or
common
law.
The Gaming
games
Acts of 1738,
:
1739, and
1744
scope of the Lottery Acts, viz. ace of hearts, pharaoh, basset, hazard ; passage and other games with dice, except backgammon
roulet or roly poly.]
702.
What
in fact
11
ties to a transaction
alleged to be a wager
Alleged wagers
is
a question
Digitized
by Microsoft
312
for the jury.W
tract,
(a)
LAW OF CONTRACT
A
contract
may
so
be a wagering conit.(b)
on the face of
(b)
Universal Stock Exchange \. StYacban [1896] A. C. 166. Hilly. Fox (1859) 4 H. & N. 359.
Carlill V. ^Carbolic Smoke
Ball
Co.
[1892]
Q.
B.,
at p.
,492
[Semble, there
in
both parties to
on
703. Any promise, express or implied, to pay any person any sum of money paid by him under or in
respect of any contract falling within 697, or to pay
fee,
reward,
with,
is
null
sum of money.
i.
[. g. if A, at B's request, settles B's debts for lost wagers, is precluded by this from recovering from B the sums so paid Or if by him (Tatam v. Reenii [1893] I Q. B. 44). entrusts money to B for the purpose of betting on their joint account, A
B
I
in
Mayer [1901]
K. B.
Money
wager
re-
ceived on
704. Notwithstanding 6g/, if one person makes bets as agent for another, and wins, the principal
may
borrower to pay his lost bets could Act, 1892. {Ex parte Pyke (1878) Quare since the Act. Quare, money lent to enable 8 Ch. D. 754). the borrower to make bets. {Saxby v. Fulton [1909] 2 K. B. 208.)]
lent to enable the
be,
[Money
Gaming
Digitized
by Microsoft
313
or
mortgage,
given
in
Securities for
whole or in part for any money or valuable thing ^X^ won by gaming or by betting upon any game or pastime, or for repaying any
^"^
money
gam-
is
deemed
i.
[The result of this rule is, briefly, that the holder of such an instrument must show that he gave value for it. Even then he will not be able to enforce it, if the other party shows that he (the
holder)
illegality
when he
705a.
J
.1
The
1
bill,
or mortgage as
r
Recovery of
IS
described in 705, who pays the amount or money thereby secured, to any indorsee, holder, or assignee
,1
money paid
thereundeT
thereof,
may
recover the
amount
so paid as a debt
whom
the note,
bill,
[A banker to whom a cheque has been handed for collection is a " holder " for purposes of this ; and ifthe drawer of the cheque pays him, he may recover the amount from the person to whom the cheque was given {Dey v. Mayo [1920] 2 K. B. 346). The point is under appeal. (See Briggs v. Sutlers, 1920, Times, Newspaper,
7th December.)]
706.
The
provisions of this
Section extend
to
Stock
Ex-
'Jtlfns"'''"''
Grizewoodw. Blane (1851) ii C. B., at p. 538. Thacher v. Hardy (1878) 4 Q. B. D. 685. Forget V. Ostigny [1895] A. C. 318 (P. C).
Digitized
by Microsoft
,!ili
/-
Digitized
by Microsoft
BOOK
Part
II
OBLIGATIONS
III
When
Definition
in fact
to that effect,
such
obligation
Moses
V.
said to arise
from Quasi-contract.
[It is somewhat difficult to find a special place, in the scheme of English Law, for a department of Quasi-contract which shall be distinct, on the one hand, from Contract, and, on the other, from Quasi-contractual obligations are, really imposed by law as Tort. the result of a desire to do justice between parties who have been brought into relation with one another, where such relation is not For example, if A, under a mistake of'fact, strictly one of contract. pays money to B which he does not owe him, A certainly ought to But on what technical ground B has not be able to recover it.
.?
promised to repay the money ; indeed the implication is that in An obvious all probability he received.it intending to keep it. that B has been guilty of a wrong (or Tort) in suggestion is withholding money which does not belong to him ; and, but for
:
Digitized
by Microsoft
3i6
it is quite possible that English law would have taken this view. But the position hardly appeared to satisfy the legal conception of a Tort. And so English Law, unable to class such obligations either under Contract or under Tort, classes them under Quasi-contract ; as closely, though not completely, resembling contractiial obligations. The truth of this statement, as well as the test of its application, is to be found in the fact that, under the old system of pleading, such obligations were enforced by the action of Assumpsit, like true contractual obligations. The scantiness of the English Law of Quasi-contract is due to two causes; one substantial, the other technical. The one is the highly formal character .of our early law, with its sharp distinction between law and morality ; an example of which is the fact that the voluntary benefactor or agent (jiegotiorum gestor) has, even now, no action to recover his actual expenditure, though that expenditure may have resulted in pecuniary benefit to the person on whose behalf he acted. The second cause is the fact, that English Law prefers to class a
technical reasons,
good many obligations, which are really quasi-contractual, among obligations arising from implied promises in contracts. For example, the various .obligations of the. innkeeper, the agent, and the' bailee (ante^ Book II, Part II) are treated as arising out of implied promises ; though it would be a violent straining of probability to pretend that the minds of the parties adverted to them on each occasion of entering into the contract of which they are deemed to form a part. The fact that^there is such a contract, makes it convenient to treat them as parts of it. The need for the separate recognition of a quasi-contract only arises, when there is no true contract with which the obligation which it is desired to enforce can be connected.]
Remedies
708.
The consequenccs
same
as those attend-
probably, the
system of pleading, the appropriate remedy for breach of quasi-contract was, as above stated, the action of AssumpThere is, however, it is believed, no case in which a remedy in sit. the nature of specific performance would lie to compel the fulfilment of a quasi-contractual obligation,]
fact that, in the old
Money paid
'an/s"ttst
Digitized
by Microsoft
QUASI-CONTRACT
ings or legal restraint of goods, to
317
primarily
to
in-
to
latter
is
bound
him
in
respect of such
payment or peris
formance/*)
But (subject
to 710) there
no such
act;
payment or
act/*"^
3
Duncan
Roberts
v.
Benson (1847)
Exeh. 644.
(b)
p.
Crowe (1872) L. R. 7 C. P., at p. 637. Edmunds v. Wallingford (1885) 14 Q. B. D., at pp. 814-5. Tubbs V. Wynne [1897] i Q. B. 74. Falcke v. Scottish Imperial Insurance Co. (1886) 34 Ch. D.,
v.
at
248.
[This is the principle upon which rest the obligation of a jointpromisor to contribute to a payment by his co-promisor {ante., Book II, Parti, 365), the obligation of a principal debtor to indemnify his surety {ante., Book II, Part II, 664, 665), and the obligation of the purchaser of an equity of redemption to indemnify his vendor from the mortgage debt {Waring v. Ward (1802) It should be noticed, that there is no obligation 7 Ves., at p. 337). unless the defendajit was himself bound to satisfy the liability discharged by the plaintiff {Bonner v. Tottenham and Edmonton Society
[1899]
Q.
B. 161).]
710.
When money
Loan
"^""'
to
legally
bound
to pay,
same
position as
if
the
the principal.
Blackburn Building Society v. Cunliffe (1882) zz Ch. D. 6i. Bannatyne v. Maclver [1906] i K. B. 103.
Digitized
by Microsoft
3i8
71 1 .
y
mtsta e
^^^^ ^^ recovered by the payer from the payee, circumstances described in Book I, 91.
Funeral ex^""'"
712.
The husband
of a deceased
woman, and
the
amount of such
assets of
But the
is
liability
of personal representa-
as such
limited
by the amount of
or,
C')
the deceased
diligence,
(a)
with due
Price (1829) 3 Y.
v.
&
J.
z8,
Bradshaw
(b)
v.
Money
7iaint%'s
use
is
as for
re-
An
insurer
who has
in
[There
7
is
represented a legal
no claim unless the sum received from the third party liability {Burnand v. Rodocanachi (1882) L. R.
Digitized
by Microsoft
QUASI-CONTRACT
(ii)
319
When money
the
plaintiff,
or forcibly obtained
the
latter
may waive
the
tort
and sue
sale
title
for the
money
of the goods>)
Neate v. Harding (1851) 6 Exch. 349. Holt V. Ely (1853) I E. & B. 795. Fraser v. Pendkbury (1861) 31 L. J. C. P.
i.
(b)
Churchward
y.
Ford (1857) 2 H.
& N.
446.
(iii)
When
from third
cover from
,
entitled to re-
so obtained.
Exch. 323.
Andrews
is
v.
Hataley (1857) 26 L.
the plaintiff bound to elect between the defendant and the original debtor ? Or can he sue both ? ]
[^tere,
(iv)
A joint
tenant or tenant in
common, who
has
received
more than
is
or profits of land,
common. But the mere fact that he has enjoyed more of the benefit of the land, or made more by its occupation, will not per se render him
other joint tenants or tenants in
liable to account. (*")
(a)
&
Anne (1705)
v.
c.
3,
s.
27.
(b)
Henderson
statute
[Does the
chattels ?]
apply
co-owners of
-M
Digitized
by Microsoft
320
(v)
sideration
which wholly
fails
former
may
rescind the
contract
so paid.
latter the
amount
Wilkinson v. l,loyd' (1845) 7 Q. B. 27. Wright \: Colls (1849) 8 C. B. 150. Moeser v. Wisker (1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 120.
[This formance
in
no application to cases of impossibility of perand is independent of the plaintiff's claim for damages respect of breach of contract. (See Book II, Part I, 294rule has
;
303-)]
(vi)
When moneys
or goods
are
deposited
in
the
hands of a stakeholder
the event
determined
may
i i
recover
them from
Hoggart (1830)
B.
E.
577. 394.
When moneys
any one
such as
is
than
may
(vi), they be recovered at any time before they have been parted with by the holder in due ful-
described in sub-clause
filment
of his
instructions.
This
is
rule
apat
illegal;
any
is
rate, if the
in minori delicto.
Hastelow
v.
Jackson (1828) 8 B.
i
&
C. 221.
Q.
B.
D. 291.
Digitized
by Microsoft
QUASI-CONTRACT
Barclay v. Pearson [1893] 2 Ch. 154. O'Sullivany. nomas [1895] i K. B. 698. Hermann v. Charlesworth [1905] z K. B. 123.
321
(viii)
When
body of
of a
fused to release
them except upon payment sum of money, the plaintiff who has
paid such
sum may
&
(ix)
Money
tioner
officii,
or
by
threats,
may
Steele y. Williams (1853) 8 Exch. 625. Hooper v. M. oj Exeter (1887) 56 L. J. Q. B. 457. Maskell V. Horner [191 5] 3 K. B. 106.
di- Quantum
"'"^"'^
or not,
is
entitled
it
as at an end, he
for
may
recover
in
default
the
Pine (1825)
3 Bing.
285.
Planch'ey. Colburn (1831) 8 Bing. 14. Withers v. Reynolds (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 882.
H. & N.
73.
Adam
[In the last case, the quantum meruit was said to arise by " implied contract."]
715.
When
an
account
has
been
stated,
either Account
Digitized
by Microsoft
322
party stating
certain
to the party to
whom
it is
stated, in a
is
sum
or
treated
by the party
And where
amount of
(3.)
the balance/''^
Highmore v. Primrose (1816) 3 M. & S. 65. Roper V. Holland (1835) 3 A. & E. gg. Irving V. l^eitch (1837) 3 M. & W., at p. 107. Laney. Hill (iS^ 2) 18 Q. B. 252.
fTray v. Milestone (1839) 3
stated
is
(b)
M. & W.
21.
[An account
it
may be
& W.
it
612).
It cart v.
(Warwick
Warwick
XXXIV
T.L.R.47S).]
Action on
716. Where
jurisdictioil
judgment
adjudicated a certain
sum
to
to 717)
be enforced by action.
case
of
foreign
judgment,
jthe
de-
fendant
may
judgment was
obtained by fraud, or
that
the
proceedings in the
Digitized
by Microsoft
QUASI-CONTRACT
foreign
323
justice/''^
[But a foreign judgment does not create a debt of record in an English tribunal ; and so it is sometimes spoken of as merely " evidence of the debt " {fValker v. Witter., ubi sup.; Hallw. Odber (1809) II East, 118). A plaintiff, it may be observed, has usually a more speedy remedy on an English judgment than the bringing of an action; and, by the Judgments Extension Act, 1868, judgments of the superior courts of Scotland and Ireland can by registration be placed on the same footing in all parts of the United Kingdom. A similar privilege has been conferred on judgments of inferior jurisdiction in the United Kingdom by the Inferior Courts Judgtirfents Extension Act, 1882. No criminal penalty can be enforced under the above , even though, by the lex fori, it is payable to the plaintiff (Ranlin v. Fischer [191 1] 2 K. B. 93).]
.
717.
No
action
may
be brought
in the
in a
County Court
(*)
County
High Court;
nor
may any
Court-C-)
County
(a)
(b)
County Courts Act, 1888, ss. 63, 151. Berkeley v. Elderkin (1853) i E. & B. 805. Austin V. Mills (18 S3) 9 Exch. 288.
reason for the latter rule, which is applicable only to the County Courts, is stated to be that to allow an brought on such judgments would defeat the object of action to be the Acts, which have provided other methods for enforcing them.]
[The
modern
statutory
custom,
or
official
Official duet
required to pay a
sum of money
Digitized
by Microsoft
324
unless
contrary
ex-
Liability
719.
and on
Z^defend"
ant's request
on the person
nified
is
entitled to
be indemacted, in
(^^
was manifestly
ing
illegal,^''^
to
of such request.^")
(a)
at
isfc.
Land
Co. v. L.
& N.
W. R. (1886) 34 Ch.
D.,
[1905] A. C, at p. 397. ^w/Vr (1836) 2 Bing. N. C. 634. Burrows v. Rhodes [1899] i Q. B. 816. (c) Collins V. Evans (1844) 5 Q. B. 820. (But it must be carefully noted that, in order to escape liability on this ground, the act which the plaintiff was under a duty to do must be really, not merely apparently, the same as that which the defendant requested him to do. . g., if the plaintiff is only under a duty to register genuine transfers, and the defendant induces him to register a forged transfer, the defendant will be liable, even
(b)
Voluntary
agency
Digitized
by Microsoft
QUASI-CONTRACT
325
Book
III), a
person
who
in the preservation or
im-
in the con-
248.
721.
person
who
has been
made
liable to
pay-
Directors
^'"^'^"y ^''
an untrue statement
in a prospectus or notice,
is
under
entitled
from
been
liable to
make
84
(4).
[But this right cannot be exercised if the claimant was, and the person from whom contribution is sought was not, guilty of fraudulent misrepresentation (Companies Act, 1908, s. 84(4)).]
Note
It
may very
estate of a lunatic, to
well be urged that the liability of a minor, and the pay for necessaries (Book I, 50, 66), and
the liability of a trustee for breach of trust, as well as the liability of a beneficiary of full age and capacity to indemnify his trustee, (See Re Rhodes ( 1 890) 44 Ch. D., are all founded on quasi-contract. But these subjects will be more conveniently treated at p. 105.) under their several heads elsewhere.
Digitized
by Microsoft
B TORT
SECTION
GENERAL
I
TITLE
Definition
PRELIMINARY
an obliga-
722.
tort is a
and giving
rise to
an action
for
damages.
Actual
723. As a
tort, unless it
rule,
damage
causes appreciable
trespass
(*)
damage
in fact.
But
in
actions
for
to
land or to goods or to
libel,
se,
and
in cases
where
need
an
individual,^'')
appreciable
damage
in
fact
not be proved.
(a)
Entick
(b)
v. Carrington (1765) 19 St. Tri.' 1030. Rogers V. Spence (1844) 13 M. & W. 571. Ashby v. White (1703) 2 Ld. Raymond, 938.
respect to incorporeal hereditaments, no general rule preIn some cases, an infringement of itself gives rise to an action in others, proof of damage is essential. For the fprmer proposition
vails.
[With
see
iVilson v.
profit in
Digitized
by Microsoft
TORT (PRELIMINARY)
the soil)
;
327
Hobson v. Todd (1790) 4 T. R. 71 ; Robinson v. Hartopp (1889) 43 Ch. D. 484 (commons); Holford v. Baiiey (1849) 13 Q. B. 426 (several fishery); Embrey v. Owen (1851) 6 Exch. Co. [1904] A. C. 301 (water); 353; Macartney v. Londonderry Kidgill V. Moor (1850) 9 C. B. 364 Thorpe v. Brumfitt (1873) L. R. 8 Ch. 650 (rights of way) Brockhbank v. Thompson [1903] 2 Ch., at p. 348 (local rights); Harrop v. Hirst (1868) L. R. Contra., Angus v. Dalton (1881) 4 Exch. 43 (proprietary right). L. R. 6 App. Ca. 740 Barley Main Colliery Co. v. Mitchell (1886) L. R. II App. Ca. 127 (rights of support) Colls v. Home Colonial Stores [1904] A. C. 179 (rights of light). These cases will be considered under their appropriate headings.]
&
724.
the
When
the
damage
is
Remoteness
damage
alleged
'f '^""'"^^
^^^
but
immediate cause
may
even (subject to 732) of the plaintiff j^"*) if its effective or decisive cause was the conduct of the defendant.
(a)
Glover v. L. i^ S. W. Ry. Co. (1867) L. R. Hilly. New River Co. (1868) 9 B. & S. 30. Sharp V. Powell (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 253.
Q.
B. 25.
(b)
Lynch
v.
Nurdin (1841)
Q.
B. 29.
Clark V. Chambers (1878) 3 Q. B. D. 327. Englehart v. Warrant [1897] i Q. B. 240. McDowally. G. W. Ry. Co. [1903] 2 K. B. 331.
[By " natural and probable consequence " is meant such consequence as an average man could be reasonably expected to foresee in the circumstances of the case {Greenland v. Chaplin (1850)
5
Exch.,
at
p.
725.
The
infringement of a
right
of the
public
ifringe'""'*
when
an action
at
the suit of an
individual
"f
,
publtc right
M3
Digitized
by Microsoft
32^
(a) a
r
infringed
of,
or
(b)
damage by
I.
[A public authority is not liable to an action for mere nonfeasance, unless such liability is imposed by statute. But for misfeasance
Breach of
"^^
'duty
it
may
726.
The
an
when
by such
he has
suffered
;
special
damage
breach
(i) the
and
suffered
is
damage
by implication
(*=)
Atkinson V. Newcastle Waterworks (1877) z Ex. Gorris v. Scott (1874) L. R. 9 Exch. 125; (1878) L. R. 4 App. Ca. 13. (c) Groves V. Wimborne [1898] z Q. B. 402. Clegg V. Earby Gas Co. [1896] i Q. B. 592.
(a)
D. 441.
(b)
Ward
v.
Hoiis.
Johnston
(P.
v.
[1898! A. C.
4.4.7.
C).
Davis
V.
K. B. 170.
[Sometimes even the remedy of Mandamus is not available (Pasmore v. OswaldtwistU &c. Council [1898] A. C. 387). But w^hen the right of action for damages in respect of a breach of statutory duty is excluded, the Court may yet have jurisdiction to
.
grant a remedy by
way of injunction {Hayward v. East London Waterworks Co. (1884) 28 Ch. D. 138; Stevens v. Chown rigoxl I Ch. 894).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TORT (PRELIMINARY)
ject
329
intention or
"'si'gfu^f
mals
{post, Titt.
IV &
give rise to
either inten-
tional or negligent.
Holmes
y.
Emmemw.
Stanley v.
Mather (187;) L. R. 10 Exch. 261. Pottle (1885) 16 Q. B. D. 354. Powell [1891] i Q. B. 86.
[The
sion
V.
know
was wrongful, or
if,
defence;
Ward
harm by it, is no was either intentional or negligent {IVeaver (1616) Hob. 134; Baseley v. Clarkson (1680) 3 Lev.
that he did not intend any
in fact,
it
37)0
torts, Negligence
means
it
was the
towards the
plaintiff.C")
729)
show
Vaughan
v.
H. & N.,
at p.
688, per
Willes, J.
(b)
(c)
Tolhausen v. Davies (1888) 58 L. J. Q. B. 98. Winterbottom v. Wright (184Z) 10 M. & W. 109. Dickson V. Renter's Telegraph Co. (1877) 3 C. P. D. i. Le Lievre v. Gould [1893] i Q. B. 491. Cavalier v. Pope [1906] A. C. 428. Malone v. Laskey [1907] 2 K. B. 141. Adams v. Lanes, (r Torks. Ry. Co. (1869) L. R. 4 C. P. 730 Smith V. L. b' S. W. Ry. Co. (1870) L. R. 6 C. P. 14.
The Notting Hill (iSH) 9 P. D. 105. Smith V. Johnson [1897] 2 Q. B., at p. 61.
Digitized
by Microsoft
330
&
W.
Ry. Co.yubi
sup.).]
Res
ipsa
729.
When
live anii;nal)'i*) is
oquttur
causes
damage
to the plaintiff of a
happen
if
management
of
bound
damaging the
absence
plaintiff,
the
damage
will
be presumed
(in the
(b)
&
S. C.
Byrne
Scott
v.
Boadk (1863)
Exch. 787.
-v. London Dock Go. (1865) 3 H. & C, at p. 601. Briggsy. Oliver (1866) 4 H. & C. 403. Kearney v. L. B. 3" S. C. Ry. Co. (1871) L. R. 6 Q. B. 759.
S. W. Ry. Co. (1886) L. R. 12 App. Ca. [In fFaielin v. L. 41, and Crisp v. Thomas (1890) 63 L. T. 756, the Court apparently thought that the facts did not raise any presumption of want
&
of care.
But the
latter decision
Court and
^"'"^
(subject to
Jackson (1877) L. R.
App. Ca.,
at
p.
197, per
Cairns, L, C.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TORT (PRELIMINARY)
731
.
331
of
The
is,
degree of care or
skill
fendant
in general, that
ability
which a
man
of ordinary
in
''S'""
prudence and
circumstances.
the
is
person
who
of special
skill,
must
making
similar
Blackburne (1789)
H.
BI., at p. 161.
Prentice (1807) 8 East, 348. Chapman v. ffalton (1833) 10 Bing., at p. 63. Wilson V. Brett (1843) J i M. & W. 113.
v.
is framed in Contract or in Boorman (1844) 11 CI. & F., at p. 44, /"^r Campbell, L. C; Turner v. Stalllbras [1898] 1 Q. B. 56; Edwards v. Mallan [1908] i K. B. 1002).]
Scare
[It is
Tort (Brown
(ii)
person
who
which
bound
known
to him,
if
used
Bkkemore
&
B., at p.
105 1.
Digitized
by Microsoft
332
[^are.
{Blakemore
Holliday
'
v. Bristol
In respect of what persons does the liability extend ? Exeter Ry. Co., ubi sup.) In Longmeid v.
(1851) 6 Exch. 761, there was no evidence that the defendant knew of the dangerous character of the goods.]
(iii)
An occupier of land,
a right to
come on
to
to
it,
or
vited
by him
to
do
so,^*) is
to exercise to
care
prevent
injury
happening
them
mere
hceiisees,
he
is
known
them.^"*)
1
to him.^"^
As
respects trespassers, he
is
to inflict intentional
(a)
harm on
Griffiths v. L.
5f
St.
v. Quatermaine (1887) 18 Q. B. D. 685. Woodley v. M. Ry. Co. (1887) z Ex. D. 384. (The negligence which Cockburn, C. J., attributed in this case to the defendants was expressly explained by him to be "moral negligence" only.) (b) Parnaiy v. Lancaster Canal Co. (1839) 11 A. & E. 223. Indermaur v. Dames (1866) L. R. i C. P. 274. Heaven v. Pender (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 503. (The wider principle laid down by Brett, M. R., in this case, at p. 509, cannot be sustained.) Bede Steamship Co. v. Wear Commrs. [1907] I K. B. 310. (c) Southcote V. Stanley (1856) 25 L. J. Exch. 339. Corby V. Hill (1858) 4 C. B. N. S. zzi. Bolch V. Smith (1862) 7 H. & N. 736. Gautret v. Egerton (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 371. (d) Birdy. Holbrook (1828) 4 Bing. 628. Hounselly. Smyth (i860) 7 C. B. N. S. 731.
Walker Thomas
v.
M. R.
Co. (1886) II
Q.
B.
D. 259.
Batchelor
v.
Fortescue (1883)
1 1
Q. B. D. 474.
[The
rine's
liability
extends to a person
who
Dock
I
Cockerell
St. Katha(1868) L. R. 3 C. P. 326 (gangway); Francis v.' (1870) L. R. 5 Q. B. 501 (race-stand); Marney v. Scott
&
Co.
[1899]
Q.
B.
986
(ship)).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TORT (PRELIMINARY)
(iv)
333
^
A person who
managed with
is
likely to cause
it,
bound
is
necessary to
Dixon Parry
V.
v.
Contributory
(notwithstanding
if the
"^s^'s^""
decisive
own
negligence,'^) or
(where the
plaintiff^ is
charge of
(a)
him.*'"'
Tuffv. Warman (1858) 5 C. B. N. S. 573. Radley v. L. & N. W. Hy. Co. (1876) L. R. 1 App. Ca. 754. The Bernina (1887) L. R. 12 P. D., at p. 89 (where see valuable remarks of Lindley, L. J.). (b) Waite v. N. E. Ry. Co. (1858) E. B. & E. 719. (This decision See The was based on the doctrine of "identification," now exploded. Bernina, ubi sup., and L. R. 13 App. Ca., at p. 16 (n), where Lord Bramwell expressed the opinion that Waite' s case was wrongly decided. But, semble, Waite's case can be justified on the ground that the defendant's negligence was not the decisive cause of the damage.)
But:
(i)
though the
by the
is
negligence,
the
plaintiff
not
Digitized
by Microsoft
334
(ii)
amount of
that which
him
will not
be
capable of exercising;
s.
Lynch
Nurdin
V.
(1
841)
Williams
G.
W. R.
v.
N.
V.
287
&
C. 744
and Mangan
(iii)
to
an
was a
negligence,
no defence.
an important exception to the rule stated in this in to ship or cargo caused by collision' at sea, where In such a case, the old Admiralty rule both parties are to blame. now prevails in all Courts ; and the total loss of both parties is equally divided between them. (Judicature Act, 1873, * ^5 (9)' The Englishman and The Australia [lif)^] P. 239). But the Admiralty rule does not apply to actions for loss of life ( The Bernina (2) (1887) 12 P. D. 58).]
is
[There
the case of
damage
Act of third
plaintiff is
caused by
f^'y
Digitized
by Microsoft
TORT (PRELIMINARY)
734.
335
Justifiable
An
act
which
is
prima
may
in
(semble) be
"'^'^"""
by proof
that
it
was done
obedience to a
more pressing
Jnguj
duty.
Southend Co. (1906)
XXII T.
L. R. 222.
[Note. The negligence of trustees and executors, as such, will be more conveniently dealt with at later stages of the work. Such negligence does not give rise to an action of Tort.]
is
an essential element
Malice
that
;
it
is
in-
even though
difficult to
;
all
the cases
but reference
Tit. VII,
798
(ii).)]
Digitized
by Microsoft
336
Choice of remedies
736.
may
be both a
may
But no stranger
in Tort.^*")
to the contract
Coggs V. Bernard (1704) 2 Ld. Raymond, 909. Bradshaw-\. L. T. Railway Co, (1875) L. R. 10 C. Winterbottom v. Wright (\%\^) 10 M. & W. log. Dickson y. Reuter's Telegraph Co. (1877) 3 C. P. D. i. Turner v. Stallibrass [1898] i Q. B. 56. (b; Meux V. G. E. Ry. Co. [1895] z Q. B. 387. Ear/ V. Lubbock [1905] I K. B. 253.
(a)
&
P.
189.
\Semhle^
in
where the
Viall
plaintiff
is
and
by suing
in
Tort
{Chinery
(i860) 5 H.
&
N. 288).]
Liability
737. Where two or more persons have been concerned in the commission of a
the whole
of'the loss suffered
tort,
of co-tortfeasors.
each
is
Hable for
by the
plaintiff;
and,
therefore, separate
them-^*")
But
if
judgment
if
bar-red. ('')
(b)
(c)
Clark v. Newsom (1847) i Exch. 140. Greenlands v. Wilmshurst [191 3] 3 K. B. 507. Brinsmead v. Harrison (1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 584
7 C. P. 547.
Duck
V.
Mayeu
[1892] 2 Q. B. 511.
[A covenant not to sue is not a release (Duck v. Mayeu, ubi sup.) but taking out of Court money paid in in satisfaction of the claim is (Beadon v. Capital Syndicate (191 2) XXVIII T. L. R. 427).]
Contribution
738.
One
who
Digitized
by Microsoft
TORT (PRELIMINARY)
tort,
337
in-
fact,
any
right' to
an
others.
is
in fact
ment
for
indemnity or contribution, he
be entitled
to enforce
of committing the
facts
(Book
(a)
II,
Part
II, 535.)
M.errywe(ither v.
WeU-Blundell
(b)
Adamson
Sheffield
Nixan
first
739. Persons
are
co-tort-feasors
when one
aids,
Who
are
& M.,
at p.
J.
by reason
XXXIV T.
740.
Where
relief
is
claimed
against
facts,
different independent
*^'J^'''"-
such persons
may
of
them
same.
Frankenburg
v. Horseless v.
Q. B. 504.
Campania Sansinena
K. B.
54.
in the
action, judgment against one does not merge the claim against the others {Goldfrei v. Sinclair [1918] i K. B. 180).]
[Where same
Digitized
by Microsoft
338
tort and
741.
felonious act
may
J'
""y
Tort
Ex parte
[The
at p.
6j^,per Baggallay, L.
J.
{IVhite V. Spettigue (1845) ,13 M. 603; Appleby v. Franklin The proper method of enforcing it appears (1885) 17 Q. B. ID. 93). to be a summons to stay the civil proceedings (Smith v. Selwyn [1914] 3 K. B. 98).]
& W.
Digitized
by Microsoft
No
England
for Foreign
or possession of land
to land so situate
(*)
lie
for a tort
affecting person or
land/'')
(i)
provided that
the
wrong
would
in
have
been
actionable
if
committed
(ii)
the
wrong was
the time of
its
com-
it
was
committed/'')
Mozambique v. British South Africa Co. [1892] [1893] A. Ci 602. (b) rhe M. Moxham (1876) L. R. i P. D. 107; Carr \. Fracis Times 6- Co. [1902] A. C. 176. (c) The Halley (1868) L. R. 2 P. C. 193. (d) Phillips V. Eyre (1870) L. R. 6 Q. B. I ; Machado v. Fontes
(a)
Companhia de
2 Q. B. 358, at p.
366
[1897] 2
Q.B.
231.
[Courts of Equity sometimes entertain actions concerning contracts or equities affecting lands situated abroad,
when
the parties
can be made amenable to their jurisdiction. {Penn v. Lord Baltimore '(1750) I Ves. Sen. 445; Duder v. Amsterdamsch Trustees Kantoor [1902] 2 Ch. 132. And see Norris v. Chambers (1861) 3 D. F. & But the principle is difficult to define.] J. 584.)
Digitized
by Microsoft
340
Torts of
743.
can
be
taken
against
the
Crown
Crown
for a tort.
Tobin V. Reg. (1864) 16 C. B.
N.
S. 310.
Official liability
744. Public
officials,
Lane
K. B. 178.
J.
K. B.
11 16.
Personal
bility
lia-
745. Public
officials
may
of
officials
them on behalf of or with the authority of the Crown and the order of the Crown is no defence to such action.^^^ But they are
capacity for torts committed by
;
by
them.e")
(See also Raleigh
v.
Etttick V. Carrington (i
765) 19
St. Tri.
lojo,
Goschen, and Bainbridge v. P.. M. G., ubi sup.) (b) The subordinates of a Crown official are not his servants ; and therefore he is not responsible for their acts as an employer would be {Mersey Docks v. Gibbs (1866) L. R. I H. L., at p. 124; Fraser v.
lAiQ.
No
if
by the British
Crown.
Buron v. Denman (1848) 2 Exch. 167. Musgrove v. Chun Cheeung Toy [1891] A.
[Quesre.
C. 272.
Crown done to an England ? Quare also. Is there a converse rule which would prevent an action being brojight in an English Court
Does
this rule apply to acts of the alien friend resident in
Digitized
by Microsoft
341
who
justifies
government
747.
An
Colonial
^''^^''""'
may
plead as a defence
his
lawful authority.
jurisdiction to de-
Fabrigas (1774)
Cowp. 161,
Musgrave v. Pulido (1879) L. R. 5 App. Ca. 102 (P-X;.). Walker v. Bair J [1892] A. C. 491 (P. C).
[The
principle in
744-747
is
that
against the
that every
Crown
or
its
but
and whether
Crown
or not,
is
(subject to
746)
common law for every tort committed by him The Irish Courts have, however, held that the
not liable to be sued in them during his term of (Luby v. Wodehouse (1865) political act.
Lord Lieutenant
office, in respect
is
And
see
Musgrave
748.
ruler,^*)
No
Foreign
''Jip['J'"ij
Minister, of a foreign
or against any
;
member
("^
unless
5 P.
D. 197.
Mighellv. Sultan ofjohore [1894] i Q. B. 149. (b) Diplomatic Privileges Act, 1 708, s. j. Musurus Bey v, Gadban [1894] i Q. B. 533 ; 2 Q. B. 352. (c) Parkinson v. Potter (1885) 16 Q. B. D. 152.
Digitized
by Microsoft
342
Judicial act!
749. Subject to
lie
him
in his judicial
Q. B. 668.
i
Bottomley
v.
Brougham [1908J
K. B. 584.
[This doctrine applies, not only to the superior Courts, but to the Court of a Coroner and to a Court Martial, which are not
Courts of Record. (See per Kelly, C. B., in Scott, v. Stansfield (1868) L. R. 3 Ex. 220; Dawkins v. Lord Roieby (iSy^) L. R. 8 Qf B., at p. 263.) A magistrate, while sitting in the course of his judicial duties, has in this respect the privilege of a judge; at least so far as defamation is concerned (Law v. Llewellyn [igo6] I' K. B. 4^7). And, apparently, the privilege extends also to superior officers of H.M. forces in respect of their administrative acts {Fraser v. Hamilton (1917) XXXIII T. L. R. 431). As to whether such acts can be questioned in a civil tribunal, see Fraser
V. Balfour, ubi sup.'\
Excess of
jurisdiction
750.
will
be
liable to
an action for a
tort
committed in ex-
to
the
matter.
Halket (1839)
3
Moo.
P. C. 28.
Hottlden y. Smith
\i%^o) 14 Q. B. 841.
this rule does not also apply to a judge of a (See Anderson v. Gorrie, ubi sup., at p. 671, per Lord Justice of the Peace is entitled to certain privileges in respect of such actions (see Justices Protection Act, 1848).]
:
\^^are
whether
Forensic
privilege
751.
counsel,
No
lie
against
witnesses,
or parties,
for
words written or
spoken
fore
sup.
Lilleyy. Roney
(1892) 61 L.J. Q.
sup.
B. 727.
Bottomley
v.
Brougham, ubi
Digitized
by Microsoft
343
Ministerial
ministerial officer
is
Court or of a magistrate
is
'-^""^
-^
acting judicially;
if
on the face
be
of
it
But he
will
lia-
he exceeds
Case of the Marshahea (1613) 10 Co. Rep. 68 b. Tarlton v. Fisher (1781) z Dougl. 671.
Andrews
-v.
Harris (1841)
i
Q. B. Q. B.
3.
18.
(b)
Morrelly. Martin (1841) 3 M. & G. 581. (And compare Savacools. Boughton (1830) 5 Wend. (New York) 170.) Coote V. Lighworth (1596) F. Moore, 457. Six Carpenters^ Case (1608) 8 Co. Rep. 146 a. Jelks V. Hayward [1905] 2 K. B. 460.
And
see
Andrews
v.
Harris, supra.
753.
constable
is
also
protected
in
respect of
Constables*
^"^"^^
hand or
such
demand by
or on behalf of
s.
6.
Clark
y.
754.
No
action will
lie
of
dians by a pauper
who
has been
to work by such
Digitized
by Microsoft
344
Guardians
ministerial
the
due discharge of
their
statutory
in
duties,
and
has
suffered
injury
the
course of such
their officer.
K. B. 920.
to
\^are.
How
Trade
putes
dis-
755.
Qf
workmen
members or
all
officials thereof,
other
any
tortious
the
Trade Union.
Trade Disputes Act, 1906,
s.
4.
that the member or official cannot be sued in his individual capacity (Bussy v. Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants and Bell {1^08) XXIV T. L. R. 437).]
\_Semble, this
does not
mean
'
Defence of
756. Where an
^
act,
prima
facte tortious,
it
is
sought
TuthorL
^^
justified
was committed
is
a question of construc-
by the
act
is
legislature to
(*))
justified
or merely qualified
which case
law).('')
Vaughan v. Taff Vale Ry. (i860) 5 H. & N. 679, 'Hammersmith Ry. Co. v. Brand (1869) L. R. 4 H. L. 171. London, Brighton ts" S. C. Ry. v. Truman (i 885) L. R. 1 1 App. Ca. 45.
Digitized
by Microsoft
345
Ry. Co.
v.
(1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 733. Q. B. D. 597. Metropolitoti Asylum Board y. Hill (i88i) L. R. 6 App. Ca. 193. Rapier v. London Tramways Co. [1893] 2 Ch. 588. Midivoody. Manchester Or/. [1905] 2 K. B. 597.
Co.
Powell
V.
Fall (1880)
K. B. 205.
it
principle
[These are ail cases of nuisance but would apply to torts generally.]
;
in
respect of
Actions
ff^/J/'^^
tborities
pursuance,
or
execution,
or
intended
are
subject
to
the
of limitation
specified
in
159
(/) {_ante.
Book
and
of costs.
Public Authorities Protection Act,
1
893,
s.
i.
[As to the kind of actions which fall within this statute, see the judgment of Vaughan Williams, L. J., in Lyles v, Sovthend-on-Sea
[1905] 2 K. B.
I.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
III
CAPACITY
TORTS
is
IN RESPECT OF
Liability
of
758.
corporation
committed
corporations
by
its
of their emis
of.
2
Barwick
[It
Bank (1867) L. R.
Exch. 259.
was once thought that a corporation could not be made liable which prpof of a particular mental state {e. g. malice) was material and this view was forcibly expressed by Lord Bramwell in Abrath v. N. E. Ry. (1886) L. R. 11 App. Ca., at p. 250. But it has now been abandoned. (See Cornford v. Cariton Bank [1900] I Q. B. 22; Citizens' Life Assurance Co. v. Brown [1904] A. C. 423 (P. C.).)]
for a tort to
;
Actions by
corporations
759.
affecting
tort
business
or property ;(*)
which,
its
members.^'')
News
I
Co.
[1894]
B. 94.
Q.
B.
133(b)
Mayor of Manchester
is
N.
Williams [1891]
Q.
[It
M.
first
cited,
the
is
same
for corporations
the application
poration
assault.]
is
difFerent.
This
being
;
results
not a
human
^.,
suffer
an
Digitized
by Microsoft
347
liable infaats ana
minor
^^^
is
for a tort;
mind
in
the
essential
to
liability,
the
will
be relevant to
state
of
Stikeman
(b)
at p.
p.
Book
I,
64.)
v.
(c)
Weaver Emmens
Ward, ubi
sup.
at p.
v. Pottle
(1885) 16 Q. B. D.,
356.
a claim in
V.
[A claim really, Tort for the purpose of making a minor liable (Jennings Rundall (1799) 8 T. R. 335). See Book I, 61.]
tort
which
is
in-
infants'
'"
'
"^
no
(b)
Burnards. Haggis (1863) 14 C. B. N. S. 45. Mills V. Graham (1804) i B. & P. N. R. 140. The Queen v. McDonald (1885) 15 Q. B. D., at pp. 325
J.
&
328,
per Cave,
minor cannot be made liable in Tort for fraudulent representation, whereby he has induced
762.
Fraud of
'"/""*
Digitized
by Microsoft
348
he
is
may
fraud. (''^
in
(a) Johnson -v. Pye (1666) l Sid. Z58 (quoted at length Damson, supra). Wright y. Leonard {i%b\') 10 C. B. N. S. 258.
Stikeman
(b)
Ex parte Unity Bank (1858) 3 De G. & J. 63. Lemprierev. Lange (1879) iz Ch. D. 675. Ex parte Jones\\%%\) 18 Ch. D., at p. izo.
V. Shiell [1914] 3
[But he cannot be made personally liable to repay money {Leslie K. B. 607, questioning Stocks v. Wilson [1913] 2
)
K.B.23S).]
Torts of marrted
uiomen
763.
married
woman may
.
if
Woman's
s.
[Before the Act the separate estate of a married woman was not in equity for her general torts {Wair^ord v. Heyl (1875) But at common law a married woman could L. R. 20 Eq. 321). be sued for her torts ; though, if her husband was not joined, she
liable
could plead her coverture in abatement. If sued jointly with her husband, judgment went against both ; and she could be taken in
personal execution.
estate, the
{Scott V.
If it then appeared that she had no separate Court would discharge her as a matter of indulgence Morley (1887) 20 Q. B. D. I20).J
Torts be-
764. Husband
i
may
Digitized
by Microsoft
349
Woman's
same
s.
z.
rule prevails
of torts committed during the marriage. (See Phillips v. Burnet (1876) i Q. B. D. 436.) The rule does not prevent a married woman suing her husband to set aside a deed obtained by fraud {Hulton V. Hulton [1916] 2 K. B. 642).]
765.
respect
stranger in tort in
Actions iy
"''^"^^'
co-owners as
exercise of
plaintiff's
(a)
discretion,
the
action,
until
the
defendants.^'')
(b)
Sheehan v. G. E. Ry. Co. (1880) 16 Ch. D. 59. Lauri v. Renad [1892] 3 Ch., at p. 413. Roberts v. Holland [1893] 1 Q. B. 665. R. S. C. 1883. O. XVI. r. II.
[There is an exception from the rule in the case of Detinue ; at _ any rate where the defendant is in the position of a stake-holder, or other lawful position {Wright v. Robotham (1886) 33 Ch. D. 106). And, though the subject is obscure, it would seem that, under the old law, if one joint owner sued a stranger in respect of the joint property, the defendant could plead .the joint ownership in abatement; though, if he did not do so, and judgment was recovered against him, it was then too late to raise the point. (See notes
to
p.
Coryton
v.
Lithebye
(1670) 2
Wms.
Saund.
(edn.
1845),
at
117.)
In actions in common {Addison v. Overend (1769) 6 T. R. 766). of Trover {post^ Sect. Ill, Tit. II) evidence of co-ownership could not even be given in evidence on the general issue {Nelthorpe v. Farrington (iby^) 2 Lev. 113; Brown v. Hedges (1708) i Salk. And, apparently, a mere wrong-doer could not, even in an 290). action of Detinue, plead non-joinder of co-owners {Broadbent v. Ledward (1839) 11 A. & E. 209). On the other hand, a partowner can only recover to the extent of his interest {Addison v. Overend., ubi sup.; Dent v. Turpin (1861) 2 J. & H. 139).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
IV
LIABILITY
person
Torts of
agents
766. Every
liable
corporation)
is
for
a tort committed
ratified.
Wilson V. Tumman (1843) 6 M. & G. 236. Hilbery v. Hatton (1864) z H. & C. 8zz.
[There is a statutory exception from this rule which prevents a person (including a corporation and the partners in a firm) being sued on any representation made as to the credit of another person, unless he has actually signed such representation (Statute of Frauds (Amendment) Act, 1828, s. 6 ; Williams v. Mason (1873) 28 L. T. 232 ; Swift V. Jewsbury (1874) L. R. 9 Q. B. 301 ; Hirst v. fFest Riding Banking Co. [1901] 2 K. B. 560).]
forts of
servants
IQl.
master
in
is
of his servant,
committed
Book
I);
even though
or
is
ised
by the master.
Bayleyy. Manchester Ry. Co. (1873) ^- R- 8 C. P. 148. Hamlyn v. Houston \\')oi\ i K. B., at p. 85..
Forbidden
acts
768.
The
fact
that
the
which occasioned or
pressly forbidden
constituted
was
ex-
by the
master,^') or that
amounts
Digitized
by Microsoft
351
no defence
to
an action of
H. &C. 526.
(b)
is
Tort, where one person reserves the control and direction of the
mode
in
which work
is
to
be done by another,
servant.
he
is
Laughers. Pointer (1826) 5 B. & C. 547. Quarman v. Burnett (1840) 6 M. & W. 499. Martin v. Temperley (1843) 4 Q. B. 298. Jones V. Scullard [ligi] 2 Q. B. 565. Waldock V. Winfield [1901] 2 K. B. 596. Dewar v. Tasker and Sons (1907) XXIII T. L. R. 259.
770.
The
Evidence of
a ques-
But the
fact
that
he has {a)
the right of
or
{c)
selection,^'')
or {h) the
duty of paying,^')
committing the
prima
facie
evidence of the
relationship of master
tion
is
and
servant.
This presumpis
Brady
v. Giles
v.
(b)
Quarman
Digitized
by Microsoft
352
special
relationship
771 .A pcTson
i^2i%x.tx,
P.
D. Z05.
"
two
principals
who
unconnected"
JS^)-]
(Little-
Laugher
is
or his
employ-
ful
of his
servant
bonS
fide
had power
L. e^ S.
W.
[Does not
of ultra
vires F
Has
?
it
was an
individual
(b)
Where
master
a discretion
will
is
be
wrongly
exercised
Gofv. Great Northern Ry.
Moore
v.
C. (1861)
E.
&
E. 672.
Q.
B. 36.
(c)
It is
to
do any
Digitized
by Microsoft
353
will not
on
for a
wrongful
erty
was no longer
270
Q. B. 516.
B. 390.
Waller [1901]
Q.
{d)
tort
committed by a servant
for his
own
his
ends,
be
deemed
McManus
Rayner
v.
to
;
em-
ployment
Cricket t (1800) i East, 106. Mitchell (1877) L. R. 2 C. P. D. 357. Ruben v. Great Fingall Consolidated [i()o6\ A, C. 439.
y.
(e)
Where
is
such as to break
it
will
employment.
v. Collins [1904] i K. B., at p. 632. Cheshire v. Bailey [1905] i K. B. 237.
Sanderson
(d)?'j
employment
fact, for
the jury.
4 App. Ca. 270.
Bank ofN.
S.
Otoston (1879) L. R.
Digitized
by Microsoft
354
Independent
773.
independent contractor.
Milligan v. Wedge (1840) Repson v. Cuiitt (1842) 9
I 2 A. & E. 737. M. & W. 710.
But
viz.
:
(a)
Where
the
will
,
work commissioned
be
liable;
Gas Co. (1853) 2 E.
is
unlawful,
the
employer
,,// V. Sheffield
&
B. 757.
{h)
Where
interferes
he wild be liable
McLaughlin v. Pryor (i'842) 2 M. & G. 48. Halliday v. National Telephone Co. [1899] z Q. B. 392.
{c)
Where
there
is
statute^*) or
by the common by
employing
upon the
employer,
responsibility
an
independent
contractor
(a)
Hole
V. Sittingbourne
v. V.
(b)
Bower
Dalton
Peate (1876)
Q.
B.
(d)
Where
in
there
is
the
will
performance of the
be
liable if
work,
he
such
skill
Digitized
by Microsoft
355
Such a duty
is
cast
upon an
employer,
machinery, or other
artificial
structure,
invites
for
his
own
is
purposes,^'')
likely,
if
or
who
to
authorises
work which
danger to
his neighbours,^') or
any of the
.('')
Pickardv. Smith (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 470. Hardaker v. Idle District Board [iSg6] 1 Q. B. 335. (b) Francis v. Cockrell (1870) L. R. 5 Q. B, 501. Marney v. Scott [1899] i Q. B. 986. Cougblin V. Gillison [1899] i Q. B. 45 (where the machinery in question was not used at the invitation of the defendants orin"their interests). (c) Percivalv. Hughes (1883) L. R. 8 App. Ca. 443. (d) Tarry v. Ashton (1876) i Q. B. D. 314. Penny \. Wimbledon Urban Council [18^^] 2 Q. B. 73.
Holliday v. National Telephone Co. ibid. 392-.
P.
105.
[In such cases both the employer and the independent contractor
are liable for the wrongful act of the contractor or his servant.
Whiteley Lemaitre
v.
v.
is
employed
to
Collateral
do a lawful which
act, his
employer
is
"t^acur""'
ance of the
at
p.
Hardaker s. Idle District Board [1896] I Q. B., at p. 340. Penny v. Wimbledon Urban Council li-8gg] 2 Q. B., at p. 76,
Digitized
by Microsoft
356^
Husband's
liability
775.
husband
is
liable
for
torts
committed by
to the
extent specified in
Book
136
and 137
respectively.
(1833) 5 C. & P. 484; Capelv. Powell 743, as to the effect of separation and divorce. In the case of ante-nuptial torts, the husband may be sued alone; as his liability is statutory {Beck v Pierce (1889) 23 Q. B. D., at p. 321).]
[See also
Head v.
Briscoe
S.
(1864) 17 C. B. N.
Partners'
the firm
partner.
is
10.
this
rule,
Liability
of
partnership
money or propit,
and misapplies
its
and where
partner
money
money
or prop-
Digitized
by Microsoft
357
Hable to
make good
the
s.
loss.
11.
v.
with his co-partners, and also severally, for everything for which the firm while he is a partner
is
[Every partner
liable jointly
therein
1890,,
s.
becomes
12).]
liable
(Partnership Act,
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
V LIABILITY
Domestit
animah
778. Subject to 779 and 782, a person who keeps a domesticated animal is liable for any damage
committed by
it
as the result of
its
trespassing
is
upon
of the
Brady
v. Warren [1900] 2 Ir. Rep. (Q. B. D.) 632 (tame deer). O'Gormany. O' Gorman [1903] 2 Ir. Rep. (K. B. D.) 573 (bees).
[It
liability
And there is Chitty, Pleading (6th ed.), I. 82.) liability to keep ordinary domestic! animals off the
Garage
v.
Hodges [1916]
K. B. 206).]
Animals highway
779. Subject to 781 and 784, where a domesticated animal, being lawfully upon a highway, trespasses
is
no
the
liability
negligence
is
proved
against
defendant.
Dovaston
Goodwyn
Payne (1795) z H. Bl. 527. Chevely (1859) 28 L. J. Ex. 298. Tilletty. Ward (1882) 10 Q. B. D. 17.
v.
v.
'Scienter"
780. Subject to 781 and 784, where a domesticated animal does damage of a kind not usual for such an
Digitized
by Microsoft
359
it
no
liability;
unless
is
on the part of the animal to commit such damage {^' scienter") y^ or that such damage was caused by
his negligence/'')
If
is
no
defence/''^
Hartley
Cox
(b)
(c)
V.
v. Chocqueel [1896] 2 Q. B. 109. Jackson v. Smithson (1846) 15 M. & W. 563. Jackson v. Smithson, ubi sup. (ram). Hudson V. Roberts (1851) 6 Exch. 697 (bull). Cox V. Burbidge (1863) 13 C. B. N. S. 430 (horse). Barnes v. Lucile (1907) 96 L. T. 680 (dog).
Osborne
[It would appear that there is no distinction in this respect between a domesticated animal known to be dangerous, and an animal fene natura {Jackson v. Smithson., ubi sup., at p. 565, per
Alderson, B).]
781.
The owner
of a dog
is
liable in
damages
dog
is
to
do such injury,
attributable to
any
I.
or premises
is
kept or
for the purposes of this , presumed to be the unless he proves that he was not the owner
7).]
^ ^
Digitized
by Microsoft
360
Dogs and oterojects
782. Subjcct to
781, a person
who
keeps a dog
is
damage committed by
is proved/''^
-
i i ,
(a)
(b)
Mason y. Keeling (1700) i Ld. Raymond, 606. Ready. Edwards 17 C. B. N. S. 245. (1864J Sanders y. Teape (1884) 51 L. T. 263. (But see Coxy. Burbidge (1863) 13 C. B. N. S., Hartley v. Harriman (1818) I B. & Aid. 620. Osborne v. Chocqueel [1896] 2 Q. B. ,109.
,
\);,
'
at pp.
400401.)
Damage
by
Hold-
wild animals
is
damage done
unless
by wild animals
(^)
;
{semble)
Brady
(b)
Hardy (1597) Cro. Eliz. 547. Warren [1900] 2 Ir. Rep. (Q. B. D.) 632. Farrer v. Nelson (1885) ij Q. B. D. 258. G" Gorman y. O^ Gorman [1903] 2 Ir. Rep. (K. B. D.) 573.
Boiolston v.
v.
[Bowlston V. Hardy has been a good deal criticised ; but it would seem that its main prdposition is still law. For the limits and peculiar methods of enforcing a claim to compensation by the tenant of
Dangerous
animals
784.
person
( ?)
of a dangerous,
ferocious, or
peril;
own
and
will
Digitized
by Microsoft
361
vicious propensities.
V.
Burdett (1846) 9 Q. B. loi. Marsland (1875) L. R. io Ex., at p. 260; in which case Bramwell, B., suggested that not even the "act of God" would be a (And see Baker v. 5^//[i9o8] W. N. 122.) defence. Filburn v. People's Palace Co. (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 258 (C. A.).
Nichols V.
May
bility
[There appears to be some little doubt as to how long the liawould remain after the animal had regained its freedom (Cox\.
Burbidge (1863) 13 C. B. N. S., at p. 439). Probably the true test is, whether the damage was really caused by the defendant's " keeping."
e.
g. a tiger,
and
it
escaped, and, after running wild for some months, attacked the
plaintiff,
the
ant's act.
damage might fairly be said to be caused by the defendBut if the defendant had merely tamed a native fox,
which had subsequently escaped, and, after a similar interval, robbed the plaintifPs hen-roost, it might be held that the damage was not caused by the defendant's act. (See Mitchell w Alestree (167^) i Vent. There appears to be no authority on the question whether a 295.) person who keeps an animal (not domesticated) of a kind usually
.
harmless,
is
liable (apart
from negligence)
if
it
commits damage.]
785.
for trespass
by domestiI, is
1
Destruction
*
cated animals
Book
80)
'^'
But a man
justi-
his land; if
is
animals (even
(a)
(b)
Dewellv. Sanders (1618) Cro. Jac. 490. Wadhurst v. Damme (1604) Cro. Jac. 44. Wright V. Ramscot (1667) l Wms. Saund. 82. Barrington v. Turner (1681) 3 Levinz, 28. Jansen v. Brown (1807) i Camp. 41. Wills V. Read (1831) 4 C. & P. 568.
[The
last
two
cases
show
is
somewhat
reluctant
Digitized
by Microsoft
786.
The death
commit-
at p.
45.
on
torts
The
son
to
sue
committed
chattels,^"^
and
committed within
upon
in his
which
he
himself
could
have
sued
lifetime^)
Ill (1330) c. 7 (executors). 25 Edw. Ill (1351) c. 5 (executors of executors). Smithy. Colgay (1595) Cro. Eliz. 384 (administrators). Hatchardw. Mege (1887) 18 Q. B. D. 771. (b) Civil Procedure Act, 1833, s. 2. (The action must be brought within one year after the death.)
(a)
4 Edw.
(i)
The
Digitized
by Microsoft
363
an action
damages
in respect of
such wrong-
amounted
3
Readw. G. E. Ry.
Co.
(1868) L. R.
Q.
B. 555.
but
(i)
deceased
[For the extended meaning of these words see
s.
5 of the Act.J
(ii)
the
is
deceased
Blake
\.
Midland Ry.
Co.
(1852) i8 Q. B. 93.
(iii)
(after deduct-
must be divided among such of the abovementioned persons in such shares as the jury
shall
(iv)
by
may
For the
special
post.,
of
damages under
Tit. VII,
799
(note).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
364
(c)
party, liabihty
may
1
arise
LiabiHty Act,
880,
Workman
accident.
injured,
or
his
even
1906,
s.
13.
[The case appears to be otTierwise with regard to claims under the Employers' LiabiHty Act, 1880 (McCarthy v. Jacob and Richardson, quoted hy Kuegg, Employers' Liability,&c.{jth. edn.), p. 133).]
3.Ct
.'-
Death of
tort-feasor
1^1.
The death
his
extinguishes
cases:
(i)
except
in
the
following
Where
and therewith
in-
creased his
own
estate,
an action
property; appropriated
Hambly
v.
Trott {yj^fi)
i'
Cowp. 371.
Phillips V.
[Of
(ii)
the ejector.]
six calendar
months
his death,
committed a
Digitized
by Microsoft
365
1833,
s.
z.
(iii)
13.
otherwise with regard to claims under the Employers' Liability Act, 1880 {Gillett v. Firbank (1887) III T. L,
[The
rule
is
R. 618).]
788.
The
right to recover
damages
for a tort
cannot
Assignment
jr^^^
May
Dawson
(The gene-
ral
v.
Mitchell (1890) 25
Q.
except that
(i)
rights of action in
in bankruptcy,^*) or
the liquidator of a
company
may
be by him
assigned to a stranger;
(a)
(b)
Seears. Lawson (1880) 15 Ch. D. 426. Re Park Gate. Waggon Works Co. (1881) 17 Ch. D. 234.
Digitized
by Microsoft
366
(ii)
not
a claim to recover
the
Dawson
v.
damages
meaning of
G. N.
this .
i
&
[Probably this principle would be held to apply to all cases of claims to compensation under Acts of a similar character,]
Assignment
ti^torf"'^
789.
liability in
voluntary assignment.
[It
is
but
it
is
not easy to find an eji^l^ess authority for this statement; conceived that it is indisputable.]
Rights of bankrupt
790.
The
right to recover
damages
for a tort,
com-
ruptcy, which
is
But a
right to recover
which causes
may
(a)
sions of
Book
I, 70.^*^^
M, & W. 601 (Act of 1836). (1843) 11 M. & W. 625 (do.). Rogers v. Steme (1846) 12 CI, & F. 700 (do.). Re Wilson\\%i%) 8 Ch. D. 364 (C. A.) (Act of 1869). Rose V. Buckett [190 1] z K. B. 449 (Act of 1883). (b) Beckham v. Drake (1847) z H. L. C. 579. (But this was really claim on contract.) md^son V. Sidney (1866) L. R. i Ex. 313.
'koioardw. Crow'ther (1841) 8
Brewery.
Dew
'
"
'
Digitized
by Microsoft
367
rise to Douiie
two
distinct torts,
one of which
is
to the person,
and
'^"""^
may be claimed by the trustee in bankruptcy of the person injured, according to the prothe latter passes to or
visions of
Book
I,
70
on the
at
[But when a single cause of action causes both personal and it is doubtful whether there can be any severance of action {Hodgson v. Sidney., ubi sup. ; and Morgan v. Steble (i872)L. R. 7Q. B. 611).]
proprietary damage,
792.
liability in
Tort
is
Liabilities of
''""'"'"P'
1914,3.30
(i).
Re Newman (1876) 3 Ch. D. 494 (C. A.) (Act of 1869). Re British Goldfalds of W. Africa [1899] 2 Ch. 7. (Act of 1883.)
[By section 10 of the Judicature Act, 1875, the rules of bankruptcy on this point apply equally in the winding-up of insolvent companies by the Court. But a claim for the value of specific goods
which have passed to a trustee in bankruptcy by virtue of the order and disposition clause of the Bankruptcy Act, 1914, s. 38 (c), can be proved in the bankruptcy (^1? Button [1907] 2 K. B. l8o).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
368
Accord and
satisfaction
793.
^gj-gg
may
sat-
When
Boosey v.
Wood (1865)
to be
[There would
also
seem
I,
be discharged by mere Agreement, if accepted as satisfaction. (See Hall v. Flockton (1851) 14 Q. B., at But there does not appear to p. 386, affirmed 16 Q. B. 1039.) be any express authority on the subject.]
doubt that, as in the case of 351), a claim in Tort may such agreement is expressly
Release of
right
794.
release
right of action in
seal;
Tort
may be
discharged by
is
under
and no consideration
necessary
[A
r.
release
must be
specially pleaded.
R.
S.
C,
1883, O.
XIX,
15.]
Limitation of
actions
795.
right of action in
Tort
will
be barred by the
Book
I,
159,
and Bk.
exceptions described in
Book
I,
160-169.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
796.
injured
VII
REMEDIES
He may
FOR TORTS
person
for
Pecuniary
an action
^^"'"^^
pecuniary damages.
stitution,
{ante,
Bk.
I,
abatement
{ante,
Bk.
181,
and
post,
843-848), injunction
{post,
817,
the
rules
affecting
particular torts,
see
under such
torts
respectively.]
797.
The amount
is,
Measure of
'^'"""^^
Tort
is
of damages
quence {ante
(a)
tort.^*"^
(b)
Duberley v. Gunning (1792) 4 T. R. 651. N. W. Ry. Co. (1873) L. R. 8 Ex. 221. Rowleys. L. Johnston v. G. W. R. [1904] 2 K. B. 250. Watt V. Watt [1905] A. C, at p. 121. Hadley v. Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch. 541. The Netting Hill (1884) 9 P. D., at 113, per Brett, M.R.
'
[Where the loss, though proximately caused by the tort of the defendant, was the result of the plaintiff's own wrong-doing, the loss is not deemed to be the natural and probable consequence of the defendant's tort {Weld-Blundell v. Stefhens [1920] A. C. 956).
Digitized
by Microsoft
370
Exemplary and nominal
damages
798.
aggravation,
into account
matter of
vindictive or exemplary
:
damages
(i)
was committed
in
an insulting
\.
Harvey (1814)
Taunt. 442.
(ii)
Where
54.
M. R.
Co. (1861; 10 C. B.
N.
S.
287.
(iii)
Where
Wade (1769)
3 Wils.
18..
(iv)
Where
stitutional right.
Httckle V.
Money (1763)
2 Wils. 205.
[But the jury ought not to treat such matter of aggravation as giving a separate or independent right to damages {Anderson v, Calvert (1908)
XXIV
T. L. R. 399).]
On
(i)
contemptuous damages
where
&
or
The
action
is
plaintiff's right
B.
Ad. 415.
at p.
(ii)
The
plaintiff,
though technically
justified,
ought
have brought
Digitized
by Microsoft
371
his costs, or
v.
may
be deprived of
Petherick
(i879)4Q,B. D.
6ii).J
799.
The
jury
may
Estimate of
"^"^^
loss/'')
(b)
i.
[There was, apparently, a partial exception from the last rule in the case of claims under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1846 (Hicks v. Newport, i^c. Ry. (1857) 4 B. & S. 403 n. ; Grand Trunk Ry. v. Jennings (1888) L. R. 13 App. Ca. 800). But it has now been abolished (Fatal Accidents (Damages) Act, 1908. s. i).]
trial
or
unreasonably
small,('')
the
Court
(a)
may
Cox
Phillips
order a
L.
new
W.
trial
of the action.
4 Q.
B.
V. English,
V.
i^c.
S.
(b)
5
(1879)
D.
406;
Q.
B.
D. 168.
convinced
by the
jury, or that
sideration; or
Phillips V. L. S. IT. Ry. Co.
Johnston v. G.
W.
Digitized
by Microsoft
372
(ii)
no true verdict
;
at all,
but the
mere compromise
or,
(iii)
is
men
unless
swayed by preju-
dice or passion.
Metropolitan Ry. Co. v. Wright (1886) L. R. 11 App. Ca. 152. Praed y. Graham (1889) 24 Q. B. D. 53 (approved in Johnston v.
G.
W.
at p.
255).
though
[The Court has no power to alter the assessment of damages it may order a new trial {Watt\. Watt [1905] A. C. 115).]
Continuing
''"'*'
is
a continuing injury,
But damages
;
will
be assessed
down
future
and
in respect of
damage
Holmes
V.
a fresh action
must be brought.
Wilson (1839) 10 A. & E. 503. v. Fellowes (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. ^65. Hole V. Chard Union [1894] I Ch. 293.
Whitehouse
of a continuing from day to day, the defendant might by means of his wrongful act acquire It must be remembered, that the title to an estate or easement. payment of damages in such cases does not amount to a purchase of the right to continue the act complained of.]
if,
[The
in the case
One
tort, one
from
loss,
a single
ground of action,
for
action
including prospective
Digitized
by Microsoft
373
same action but {semble) no damages can be awarded in respect of a merely apprehended tort/'')
the
^^'>
;
at
Hodsoll V. Stallehrass (1840) II A. & E. 301. Darley Main Colliery Co. v. Mitchell (1886) L. R. II App. Ca., pp. 132, 144. (b) Non obstante s. 2 of the Chancery Amendment Act, 1858. Dreyfus v. Peruvian Guano Co. (1889) 43 Ch. D. 316.
(a)
Cowper
Martin
V. Laidler [1903] 2 Ch. 337. (But see Holland v. Worley (1884) 26 Ch.
v.
D. 578, and
Price [1894]
Ch.,
at p.
284.)
loss arising
loss,
"^^
""''
Crumble
And
Colliery Co. v. Mitchell, ubi sup. Wallsend Local Board [1891] I Q. B. 503. see Greenwell v. Low Beechburn Colliery Co. [1897] 2 Q. B. 165.
v.
Main
whose land
last two rules is, e. g., that a landowner owing to his neighbour working coal in his (the neighbour's) own land, is entitled to damages for all loss arising from that particular subsidence but not for depreciation in value .of his land due to the risk of further subsidence. If future
[The
result
of these
subsides
subsidence takes place, he will be able to bring a fresh action {ff^est Leigh Colliery Co v. Tunmcltfe [1908] A. C. 27).]
804.
When
the
same
act,
two
may
torts
sue sepa-
damages
in respect of each.
B.
D. 141.
144, per Lord
ubi sup., at p.
Digitized
by Microsoft
374
Injunction
805.
an
in-
commission of an apprehended
the
is
Court
will not
^b),
Crowder v. Tinkler (i8l6) 19 Ves. 622. Earl of Ripon v. Hohart (1834) 3 My]. & K. 1 69. A. G. V. Corp. of Manchester [1893] 2 Ch. 87. A. G. V. Corp., of Nottingham [1904] I Ch. 673.
Grounds far
tnjunc ton
its
discretion,
a reasonable appretort,
and
where the
loss
of damages
(i)
by a continuance or
repetition
of the tort
Southey
v.
or,
Bacpn
Hilton
V.
V.
Sherwood (18 1 7) 2 Mer., at p. 438 (copyright). Jones (1839) 4 My. & Cr., at p. 436 (patent). Earl Granville '(1841) Cr. & Ph., at p. 292 (land).
Jones (1841)
ibid., at p. 301 (do.). Gas Consumers Co. (1853) 3
Harman
A. G. p. 320.
Baird
v.
V. Sheffield
De G. M. &
G.,
at
Thorley
V.
v.
Wells (1890)
p. 588.
(ii)
would be irreparable
or,
Forbes (1836) 2 Myl. & Cr. 123. V. Forbes (1867) L. R. 5 Eq., at p. 172. A.G. V. Cambridge Consumers Gas Co. (1868) L. R.
A. G. Cooke
4Ch. App.,
atp. 81.
Digitized
by Microsoft
375
or,
the loss
is
Soltau V. de
133.
A. G.
Cambridge Consumers Gas Co., ubt sup., at p. 81. Inchhald v. Robinson (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. App. 388.
V.
(iv)
prevention
8
or,
Clowes
P-
\. Staffordshire
Ch. App.,
at
43-
(v) the
A. G.
V. Sheffield v.
Stanford
(b)
Roberts v.
Gas Consumers Co. ubi sup., at p. 315. Hurlstone (1873) L. R. 9 Ch. App. I 16. Gwyfrai District Council [1899] 2 Ch. 608.
(vi)
manof his
knowledge of the
endeavoured to
illegality
action, or has
steal
march
upon
J
or an order of the
Court.
Fon Joel
Colls V.
V.
Home
C,
at p.
Macnaghten.
before the
cases
* ^5 (^)> ^^ But interlocutory orders are only (1878) 10 Ch. D. 294). granted with caution, when the Court is satisfied that the matter is
trial of the action, by where it appears to the such an order should be made interpreted by Day v. Brown-
is
there
v.
is
500), and, in cases of libel, only when "it is clear that if a jury gave a verdict for the defendants, it would be set aside as unreasonp.
Digitized
by Microsoft
376
able" (Bonnard v. Ferryman [1891] 2 Ch. 269; approved in TKe Court always Monson V. Tussaud [1894] I <^ B. 671). demands, as a condition of granting an interlocutory order, that the plaintifF shall undertake to indemnify the defendant against the loss caused by the order; if at the trial it shall appear that there is no case for an injunction. But the Court cannot compel a plaintifF to accept an order on such terms {Tucker v. 'New Brunswick Trading Co, (1890) 44 Ch. D. 249).]
Mandatory
is
merely prohibitory;
and
the plaintiff
to the Court,^''^
Court
^
may
at the
time
when
was
made.^*^
(a)
(b)
(c)
Smith Smith
(d)
Smith (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 500. Smith, ubi sup. Smifyb V. Day (1880) 13 Ch. D. 651. Krehl V. Burrell (1877) 7 Ch. D. 55I; II Ch. D. 146. ^i Daniel v. Ferguson [1891] 2 Ch. 27.
v.
(e)
Isenherg
E.
I.
Ho.
Co. (1863) 3
De G. &
S., at p.
272.
[This order used only to be granted in indirect language. The defendant was "restrained from permitting (the obstruction) to remain." But this scruple is now abandoned {Jackson v. Normanhy Brick Co. [1899] I Ch. 438). It is clear that, since the Judicature Act, the Court has had power to grant even a mandatory injunction by way of interlocutory order; though such power will only be
exercised with great caution {Daniel v. Ferguson., ubi sup.
;
Von Joelw.
Digitized
by Microsoft
377
Damages
^-HfiJ^'
in
if it
thinks
fit,
award
damages
s.
2.
[The statute is repealed by the Statute Law Revision and Civil Procedure Act, 1883, s. 3; but the jurisdiction is saved by s. 5 (b) of the latter statute (See Sayers v. Collier (below) and Re R.
;
[1906]
Ch. 730).]
and
will
(i)
do so
if
either
Court to refuse an
remedy,
injunction; or
Eastwood
Sayers
V.
Lever (1863)
D.
J.
&
S.
103.
v. Collyer
(ii)
is
small,
and
is
money pay-
would be oppressive
to the defend-
Ch.,
at p.
322.
Ibid., at p.
(iii)
the plaintiff
legal
rights,
is
damage.
Llandudno Urban Council
Behrens
v.
v.
Ch. 705.
Digitized
by Microsoft
3/8
substitute
damages
defendant.
for
an
Cowfer
V. Laidler
Account
plaintiff's
has resulted in the appropriation or user by the defendant of the plaintiff's property, the plaintiff may, at his
option, instead of a
judgment
for
damages, obtain, as
an account of
profits received
for
amount
as shall be
have been
Colhurn Neilson
v.
Simms (1843)
v. Betts
Saxlehner
v.
Ch. 893.
an alternative to the claim for (Lever v. Goodwin, uhi sup,, at But where the defendant's conduct involves p. 5,^^r Collins, L. J.), the commission of more than one tort, an account may be claimed in respect of one, and damages in respect of another {Llynvi Co. v. Brogden (1870) L. R. 11 Eq. 188). Before the Judicature Act, a Court of Equity could only entertain a claim for an account in Tort as ancillary to a claim for an injunction {Moxon v. Bright (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. 292; Betts v. Gallais (1870) L. R. 10 Eq. 392).
[The
damages
in respect
of the same
tort
Digitized
by Microsoft
379
^are, since the passing of the Act. ^are, also. Does this rule cover all cases of Tort involving appropriation or user of another's property ? In cases of infringement of patent, an account cannot now be demanded as of right (Patents Act, 1919, s. 10).]
Delivery of
is
success- P"""'"
the Court
may
S.
by the
Sheriff.
[This has, of course, long been the rule with regard to land. for the recovery of chattels in specie (other than in replevin {post,-^ 867) and in rare cases in Equity) existed until the passing of the Common Law Procedure Act, 1854, s. 78; and even that statute, apparently, applied only to actions of Detinue. With the abolition of forms of action, however, the remedy became general. The appropriate machinery in the case of land is a writ in the case of chattels, a writ of delivery, followed, of possession if necessary, by a writ of assistance {Wyman v. Knight (1888) 39 Ch. D. 165).]
But no machinery
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
II
TITLE
TRESPASS
is
Definition
any unauthorised
interact,^''^
or
(a)
is
not intentional/'^^
(b)
Enticky. Carrington (1765) 2 Wils., at p. 291. Holmes v. Mother (1875) L. R. 10 Exch. 261 (not land). Stanley v. Powell [l^l] 1 Q. B. 86 (do.).
\^^are,
voluntary act,
Ward
(c)
means of a due to the negligence of the defendant {Weaver v. (1616) Hob. 134; Holmes v. Mather, at p. 269).]
if
is
Base ley v. Clarkson (1680) 3 Levinz, 37. Gregory v. Piper (1829) 9 B. & C. 591.
[The proper remedy under the old procedure for trespass to land was a writ of Trespass quare clausum fregit. But where the harm was not immediate but consequential, or where the injury was regarded as being done to a right and not to possession, as, e. g., the disturbance of an easement, or where the party injured had an interest in reversion or
remedy was Case. Case was a very general form of action, based on the Statute of Westminster the Second and it became the remedy for numerous torts besides injuries to land, e.g., libel, slander, and conversion. It developed a variety of specialised forms, generally known by the name of the particular tort remedied. The gist of this action was the damage caused by the infringement of another's legal rights. For historical reasons, the action founded on
the straying of cattle {ante, 778)
is
Trespass.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TRESPASS
812.
381
lies
An
action
of Trespass
for
'mterference Extent
of
with the
be- f"^"'""
cumbent
thereon;^'')
but (semble)
is
this
right,
for the
Hmited to so
much
have been
(a)
Martin
Goodson
Pountney v. Clayton (1883) 11 Q. B. D., at p. 838. Mayor of Tunbridge Wells v. Baird [i 896] A. C. 434. (b) In Pickering v. Rudd (181 5) 4 Campb. 219, Lord Ellenborough thought that an interference with the column of air superincumbent on a close was not remediable by Trespass quare clausum /regit, but by Case (See also Fay v. Prentice (1845) 14 L. J. /. e. damage must be proved. C. P. 298.) But see Kenyan v. Hart (1865) 6 B. & S., 249; Wandsworth Board v. United Telephone Co. (1884) 13 Q. B. D. 904; Lemmon V. Webb [1894] 3 Ch., at p. 20; Belts v, Pickford [1^06] 2 Ch. 87.
813.
of the
An
""^
"""'
with or
without
(b)
v. Wadsworth (1805) 6 East, at p. 609. Cary v. Holt (1746) 2 Stra. 1238. Harkerv. Birkbeck (1764) 3 Burr. 1563. Graham V. Peat (1801) i East, 244. Ryan v. Clark (1849) Q- ^- ^S-
Crosby
[It seems that when the plaintiff is entitled to the exclusive enjoyment of the vesture or herbage of the land, or of several fishery or free warren in alieno solo, he is also allowed to bring the action
Trespass (Co. Litt. 46; Wilson v. Mackreth (1766) 3 Burr. 1824; Crosby V. Wadsworth (1805) 6 East, 602; Holjordv. Bailey So also if he is exclusively (1849) 8 Q. B. 1000; 13 Q. B. 426). entitled to a crop (JVellaway v. Courtier (igij) XXXIVT. L. R. 115).]
of
Digitized
by Microsoft
382
Tenant at
will
re-
or
the
immediate landlord
can sue.
Bro. Ab. Trespass,
pi.
131.
i
Taunt.,
at p.
J.).
Lodger
815.
lodger
who has
room or rooms
house can
(probably)
lord
;(*)
sue
in
room
to him.C')
(a) Dean v. Hogg (1834) ' ^ing., at p. 351 ; Lane v. Dixon (1847) C. B. 776. (But see dicta in Allan v. Overseers of Liverpool (1874) L. R. 9 Q. B., at p. 191, 192 ; and Holywell Union \..Halkyn DrainThese were, however, both age Co., [1895] ^- ^-y ^^ PP- '^^ '34rating cases ; in which other considerations apply. (b) fFright V. Stavert (i860) 29 L. J. Q. B. 161. 3
Occupier
certain
and exclusive
interest,
Baxter
v. Ta-ylor
(1832) 4 B.
&
Ad. 72,
Temporary
ejectment
817.
person
who
is
in
possession
of
is
land,
title,
and who
expelled
by a mere
trespasser,
Digitized
by Microsoft
TRESPASS
383
him;
riiereily
title.
evicting
Browne V. Dawson (1840) 12 A. & E. 624. Lows V. Telford (1876) L. R. 1 App. Ca. 414.
818.
Entry
sion of land
may make
and such entry will have the effect of vesting the possession in him,W notwithstanding that another person
remains without
entitled
title
on the
land.^'')
If a person so
makes a
forcible
and
will not
be
liable
damages
for
he will be
Lows
Jones
V.
(b)
Butcher
V.
v.
Chapman (1847)
426).
c. 7.
Lows
5 Ric. II.
(1381J
Hen. VI (I429) c. g. (d) Turner v. Meymott (1823) I Bing. 158. Harvey v. Brydges (1845) 14 M. & W. 437 (approved in Lows v. Telford, ubi sup., at p. 426, non V. Harland (1840) I M. & Gr. 644). Burling v. Read (1850) 11 Q. B. 904. (e)
8
(f)
Exch. 261
obstante
Newton
Hemmings v. Stoke Pages Club [1920] 1 K. B. 720. Beddall V. Maitland (1881) 17 Ch. D. 174. Edwick V. Hawkes (1881) 18 Ch. D. 199.
i
Q.
B. 730,
it
was held
that there
was no
forcible entry.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
384
Relation
819.
sion
A
to
back
of land
on completing
his
title
it
by
entry,
deemed
when
He
in respect of trespasses
and
Barnett v. Earl of Guildford (1855) II Exch, 19. Anderson v. Radcliffe (1858) E. B. & E. 806. Ocean Accident Co. v. Ilford Gas Co. [1905] z K. B. 493. (b) Tharpe v. Stallwood (1843) 5 M. & Gr., at p. 774.
justertii
may
justify
by
setting
up
title
in himself.^^^
But
he cannot
tertii);
justify
by
setting
up
title
in another {jus
unless
This
is
called
freehold,
' '
or of liberum tenementum.
For the nature and effect of the plea, see Ryanw. Clark (^i%/\-<)) (b) Chambers v. Donaldson (1809) 11 East, 65. Jbnes V. Chapman (1849) 2 Exch. 803.
14Q.
B. 65.
Trespass ab
initio
821
One who
under an au-
thority given
authority by an act
W
v.
v.
^~^'),
is
deemed
to
(a)
,.;
trine
[Since the Distress for Rent Act, 1737, ss. 19 and 20, this docno longer applies to distress for rent nor, since the Poor
;
s.
8, to distress for
poor
rate.]
b.
Digitized
by Microsoft
////
TRESPASS
822.
385
An
may
be
justified
justification
of trespass
that
it
more
inn;
particularly,
made
b.
where
common
(^)
by a
committed
ihid.
(y)
Co.
201
b.
W.
465.
(8) in
Semayne's Case (1604^ 5 Co. Rep. 91 Cooke V. Birt (18 1 4) 5 Taunt. 764..
(e)
to prevent the
v.
commission of murder
&
P. 260.
Handcock
Baker (1800) 2 B.
(0
Jones
V.
which cannot
otherwise be abated;
Williams (1845) II
v.
M. & W.
post^
176.
;
Lemmon
Webb [1894]
JO
3 Cli., at p. 13
[1895] A.
C,
at p. 5.
843-848.]
custom;
'! '.i
Tyson V. Smith (1838) 9 A. & E. 406. Mercer v. Denne [1905] z Ch. 538.
(Paul
v.
O 2
Digitized
by Microsoft
386
^i-'^
9 Edw. IV (1470) 35> Pl- lo21 Hen. VII (1506) 27 b, pi. 5. Maleverer v. Spink (153?) ' ^Y^' ^t 36 b. Dewey V. White (1827) Moo. & Malk. 56, per Best, C. Cope V. Sharpe [1912].! K. B. 496.
J.
(0
to recover the
which were upon the land of the plaintiff, either as the result of an accident,^')
or by the act of the
the felonioi^s
act
plaintiff,^'')
or by
but not
(a)
otherwise.^'')
Latch, 13.
Millen v.
Hawery (1625)
V.
(b)
(c)
Patrick
V. Colerick
(d)
Higgins Anthony
v.
Haneys (1832),
8 Bing. 186.
[The
that
it
has
been
committed
right of
under
licence
granted by the
plaintiff/*^
or in the
lawful
exercise of a private
way
or other or other
easement, or of a right of
profit
(a)
common
a prendreS^^
Wood Wood
V.
V. Leadbitter
[Such a licence (unless coupled wi>:h,aii interest) may be revoked but the licensee may not be treated as a trespasser (Hurst V. Picture Theatres, Li. [1915] l K. B. i). The, revocation of the licence does not, it would seem, afect the contractual rights (if any) of the licensee (Z^mi-o v., Smith [1897] 2 Q. B. 445).]
at
any time
v., Met.
Pomfret v. Ricroft (16^9) I Wms. Saund. 321 (approved B. of Works (1874) L. R. g Q. B. 296). Mellor V. Spateman (1670) i Wms. Saund. 343,
(b)
mHoare
Digitized
by Microsoft
TRESPASS
823. The defendant
land
in
387
to Disclaimer
an action of trespass
title,
may
plead a disclaimer of
is-
barred
5.
Basely
v.
Co.,
(b)
323 J Jacobs v. Seward (1872) L. R. 5 H. L., Wilkinson v. Haygarth (1847) 12 Q. B. 837. Murray v. Hall (1849) 7 C. B. 441.
at p.
472.)
damage
common
As to the rights of corights {King v. Brozan [191 3] 2 Ch. 416), owners of land against strangers, see ante, 765.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Ejectment
II
DISPOSSESSION
825.
of land can, in addition to his right to enter peaceably on the land {ante, 8i8) recover possession against
it
for the
same
action,(^)
for dispossession
(a)
("mesne
For the history of the action of ejectment, see Blackstone, ComBook III, c. 1 1 And see note of Serjeant Manning to report oi Butcher v. Butcher (1827) 1 M. & R, zzo. A person entitled to an interesse termini may bring ejectment, if the term is actually running {Doe v. Day (1842) z Q. B. 147). Since the Judicature Act, 1873, no action for the recovery of land can be defeated for want of the legal estate, where the plaintiff has the title to the. possession {General Finance Co. v. Liberator But in other cases Soc. (1878) 10 CJi. D., at p. 24, ^ir Jessel, M. R.). the person in whom the legal estate is vested must be before the Court
mentaries,
.
{Allen
(b)
'
V.
Wood (1893) 68
r. z.
Common Law
s.
Z14; R.
S.
C,
1883,
O.' XVIII,
(The C. L.
mesne profits to a landlord suing his tenant in ejectment ; but this restriction has been removed by the R. S. C. See Dunlop v. Macedo (1891) VIII T. L. R. 43.) It is advisable to make such a claim the subject of a special indorsement under O. Ill, r. 6 ; and, if this be done, judgment can be obtained for mesne profits up to the time of acquiring possession, under O. XIV, r. I ( Southport Tramways Co. v. Gandy [1897] 2 Q. B. 66). But the special indorsement is only available on behalf of a landlord. (c) Common Law Procedure Act, 1852, s. 218. And see cases
quoted
in last note.
Co-owners
826.
co-owner
who
by
is
totally
excluded
from
his co-owners
may
recover
Digitized
by Microsoft
DISPOSSESSION
possession and mesne profits against
in the nature of ejectment.
Co.
Litt.
389
them by an action
199
b.
Common Law
Goodtitle V.
s.
189.*
Tombs (1770)
Wils. 118.
J.
Murray
[*
v.
Hall (1849) 18 L.
is
C.
P., at p. 163.
This section
Law
Revision and
is
retained by
827. The
plaintiff in
Onus pro-
own
n.
title,
and not on
Strachan (1742)
(l
T. R. 107
(j>er
Roe
V.
Harvey
Perry
v. Clissold
J.).
is
a sufficient
title
to
Harding
828. Subject to
of ejectment,
against the
title
830, the
defendant in an action
is
Jus tertu
unless
his
possession
set
wrongful as
plaintiff,^*)
may
up as a defence the
is
of another {jus
tertii),^^^
and
entitled to rely
on any flaw
(a)
plaintifT.('=)
Davison
v.
Harding
Asher
(b)
tertii is
v.
V.
Gent (1857) 3 Jurist, N. S. 342. Cooke (1831) 7 Bing., at p. 348. Whitlock (1865) L. R. I Q. B. 1.
(Quiere.
Doe
V.
Only
if
the;W
(c)
Doe Doe
V. V.
Digitized
by Microsoft
,>,
390
"
[The
in Perry v. Clissold
conclusive.]
Mere
passer
ires-
829. Posscssion
is
Sufficient
to
support an action
;
and the
title,
latter
set
plaintiff to
proof of his
nor
up a
jus
tertit.
Doe V. Dyball (1829) Moo. & Malic. 346. Browne v. Dawson (1840) 12 A. & E. 624. Davison v. Gent (1857) I H. & N. 744. Asher V. Whitlock (1865) L. R. I Q. B. I.
Estoppel
830.
plaintiff in ejecttitle
ment
such
is
to
(^)
but he
may show
with.^'')
that
(b)
Smythe (18 1 5) 4 M. & S. 347. Bayiup (1835) 3 A. & E. 188. Claridge v. Mackenzie (1842) 4 M. & Gr. 142.
the alleged lease was totally void by virtue of an e:^press
[Where
statute,
it
and lessee was not created thereby {Magdalen Hospital v. Knotis (1879) L. R. 4 App. Ca. 324).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
-ilfe'
TITLE
831.
III
NUISANCE
whereby
Definition
(>
nuisance
is
is
an act or omission
a person
whether by phys-
his
damage to the land, or by other interference with enjoyment of the land or with his exercise of an
profit,
easement,
or other similar
right,('')
or with his
is
no bar
the
I
to
an action of Nuisance.
for nuisance
The
action on
case
was
assise
local
in
its
character
Taunt. 379).
The
damage
is
unnecessary.)
[The case of Malone v. Laskey [1907] 2 K. B. 141, seems to decide conclusively that a plaintiff who has neither an interest in land nor a local right cannot recover.]
(c)
Ody (1836)
M. & W.,
at p.
459.
Fay
V. Prentice
Battishill V.
earliest private remedies in respect of nuisance were the of nuisance and the writ of " quod permittat prostei^nere " But these the latter to authorise the plaintiff to abate the nuisance. actions, being available only for and against freeholders, were ultimately superseded by the action of Case under the Statute of Westminster the Second ; which action, however, tequired proof of (See 3 Bl. Comm. special damage, and sounded only in damages. 222, and remarks of Cresswell, J., in Battishill v. Reed (1856) Still, the right to abate, as an extra-judicial 18 C. B., at p. 714.)
[The
assise
03
Digitized
by Microsoft
392
remedy, remains in certain cases but inasmuch as an injunction or mandatory order {ante. Section I, Title VII, 805-808), which may be granted at the discretion of the Court, has substantially the effect of an order of abatement, it is probable that the right of abatement, as an extra-judicial exercise of authority, will tend to fall into disfavour. See, however, Zasi? v. Capsey\^i%()i] 3 Gh. 411 ; where Chitty, J., left a plaintiff who had been refused a mandatory order, to take such steps as he might be advised to abate a nuisance on land in the occupation of a receiver appointed by the Court.]
Ground of
action
832.
/
\
An
iz-i-oo m 831
(a) in
respect of a
nuisance as denned
(private nuisance)
[In such cases actual
I
damage must
(b)
in
respect of a public
nuisance,
particular
in
whereby
the
plaintiff
has
suffered
damage
be-
common
with
members of
the public.
Benjamin v. Starr (1874) L. R. 9 C. P. 400. Lyon V. Fishmonger's Co. (1876) L. R. lApp. Ca. 662. Tottenham U. D. Council v. Williamson [1896] 2 Q. B. 353. Boyce v. Padiington Council [1903] i Ch., at p. 114; affd. [1906] A. C.
I.
Law; and
Garret,
Law
Diminution
in value
se,
...
N.
S., at p.
i
plaintiff's
may be
Soltau V.
58.
Digitized
by Microsoft
NUISANCE
834.
393
it
An act or
in fact causes
justification
rise to
an action of nuisance
if:
plaintiff,
done
in the
own
by
land
W
and cannot
annoyance,
of/''^
expressly authorised
statute,
Chasemore
v.
V.
Richards
(l
859) 7
H. L. C. 349.
Hurdman
(b)
E. Ry. (1878) 3 C. P. D., at p. 1 74. Bradford v. Pickles [1895] A. C. 587. Hammersmith Ry. Co. v. Brand (1869) L. R. 4 H. L. 171. L. B. bf S. C. R. V. Truman (1885) 1 1 A. C. 45.
latter exception, see ante. Section I,Tit. II,
N.
756.]
Estimate of
""'"^^
dis-
ment of
be had
{a) to the
322.
(J))
to
the
"
Rushmer v. Polsue [1906] i Ch., at p. 250 (adopted on appear by House of Lords [1907] A. C, at p. 123).
the
[It would seem that the latter consideration is of less importance where the nuisance complained of is directly an injury in respect of property, than where it is an injury in respect of health {St. Helen's Co. V. Tipping (1865) 1 1 H. L. C, at p. 650, per Lord Westbury).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
394
(c)
common and
business.
v. Turnley (l86z) 3 B. & S., at p. 83, per Bramwell, B. Original Hartlepool Co. Vi Gibb (1877) 5 Ch. D. 713.
Bamford
Robinson Harrison
case,
w. Kilveift v.
some
stress
(1889) 41 Ch. D., at p. 94. (In this Southwark fcf Vauxhall Co. [ 1 89 1 ] z Ch. 409. was laid on the fact that the annoyance was only temporary.)
rnvalid
excuses
is
prima
facie a nuisance,
:
(a) that
act or
per
reasonable
property
Broder v. Saillard (1876) 2 Ch. D., at p. 701. Sanders-Clerk v. Grosvenor Mansions Co. [1900] z Ch. 373.
{b)
was
in exist-
which he
suffers it;
Penruddock's Case (1598) '5 Co. Rep. loo b. Bliss V. Hall (1838) 4 Bing. N. C. 183. Tipping V. St. Helen's Smelting Co. (1865) L. R. I Ch. App. 66. Fleming v. Hislop (1886) L. R. II App, Ca., at p. 697.
{c)
that he
is
venient locality
Bamford
St.
v. Turnley (1862) 3 B. & S. 62. Helen's Smelting Co. v. Tipping (1865) II H. L. C. 642. Rushmer v. Polsue [1906] I Ch. 234; affd. [1907] A. C. 121,
(J)
Woodman [1915] A.
C. 634.
Digitized
by Microsoft
NUISANCE
The defendant may, however,
action
(semble)
right to
395
defeat the
by proving a prescriptive
of.
do the acts
complained
Elliotson V.
Feetham (1835) 2 Bing. N. C. 134. Hall (1838) 4 Bing. N. C, at p. 186. Crump V. Lambert (1867) L. R. 3 Eq., at p. 413. Sturges y. Bridgman (1879) 11 Ch. D., at f. 863.
Bliss V.
Neaverson
v.
Ch.,
at p.
564.
K. B. 648.
remarkable that there appears to be no modern case in prescriptive right was successful ; and it could, probably, only be successful where the defence showed that the defendant, in doing the acts complained of, was exercising a recognised easement or profit a prendre. It is clear that there can be no prescriptive right to comm't a public nuisance {Fowler v. Sanders (1617) Cro. Jac. 446; MoU v. S'hoowred (1875) L. R. 20 Eq., at
p.
24).]
Occupier's
'"^""
Where
the nuisance
title
is
occupier's
no bar
to his action-C*)
(Jones
v.
(a) Semble, even a weekly tenant may bring the action Chappell (r87S) L. R. 20 Eq., at p. 543). Westburne v. Mordant {1^90) Cro. Eliz. 191. (b) Beswick V. Cunden (593) Cro. Eliz. 402. ' Penruddock's Case (1598) J Co. Rep. 100 b. Thompson v. Gibson (1841) 7 M. & W., at p. 460.
838.
Action by
reversioner
^1
Ca'*
^ '
but the fact that tenants have given notice to quit in consequence of it,^'') or that the value of the premises
Digitized
by Microsoft
396
has depreciated/'^^
nent damage.
(a;
(b)
(c)
(1767) 4 Burr. 2 1 41. 11 A. & E. 40. Kidgill V. Moor (1850) 9 C. B. 364. Metropolitan Assocn. v. Prfci (1858) 5 ,C. B. N. S. 504. Harmerv. Knoides (1,861) 30 L. J. Ex. 1 02. Mfux' Brewery Co. V. CityofLondonElectricLtghtCo.[l'Sgs] Ch. 287. Simpson v. Savage (iS^S) 1 C. B. N. S. 347. Jones V. Chappell (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 539.
Jesser v. Gifjord
V.
fucker
Newman, {li^g)
[The
cases appear to
Claim of
right
839.
at
its
it
might be removed
if
a reversioner to sue,
But an
act,
even
right,
him
unless
it
in fact causes
permanent damage
(a)
to the premises.^^
&
N.
S., at p. 5
2.
Mott
(b)
ShoqUfed (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 2-2. Baxter v. Taylor (1832) 4 B. & Ad. 72.
V.
Liability of
creator of nuisance
the person
who
creates the
nuisance.^*^
The
ceeds
presumably, such
person.^')
But a
lessor
to repair, and failed to do so, is liable any nuisance arising from such failure ^'^
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
NUISANCE
and a person who
has
a
continuing
lets
397
or
sells
nuisance
remains
liable
Rosewell
Prior (1701) 2 Salk. 460. Gibson (1841) 7 M. & W. 456. Saxby V. Manchester fcf Sheffield Ry. Co. (i 869) L. R. 4 C. P. 198. Nelson V. Liverpool Brewery Co. (1877) z C. P. D. 311.
v.
Thompson
v.
(b)
(c)
Cheetham v. Hampson (1791) 4 T. R. 318. Payne v. Rogers (1794) 2 H. Bl. 350. Payne v. Rogers, ubi sup. Russell V. Shenton (1842) 3 Q. B., at p. 458.
Nelson
V.
(d)
Thompson v. Gibson, ubi sup., at p. 46 1 Todd V. Flight (t86o) 9 C. B. N. S. 377. Bowen V. Anderson [1894] I Q. B. 164.
[It appears, however, that if the lessor, in the last case, takes an express contract from the lessee to abolish the nuisance, he^ ceases
{Pretty v. Bickmore (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 401 Earner (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 658; and see Hale v. Duke of Norfolk [1900] 2 Ch., at p. 500, and Cavalier v. Pope [1905] 2 K. B., at p. 752). This doctrine seems contrary to principle ; especially if the lessor knew of the existence of the nui-
to
be
liable
v.
Gwinnell
gratjited the lease, ^uare, if it would apply where was under an absolute duty to the public, e. g. in the case of a dangerous structure abutting on or projecting over a highway. (See Tarry v, Ashton (1876) i Q. B. D. 314.)]
sance
when he
the lessor
is
Predecessor's
the
nuisance
or permits
to continue.
Penruddock's Case (1598) 5 Co. Rep. 100 b. Greenwell v. Low Beechbuni Coal Co. [1897] 2 Q. B. 165. Hall V. Duke of Norfolk [1900] 2 Ch. 493.
[If these cases are right; it would seem that there is no remedy by action unless the nuisance arises during the lifetime of the predecessor, e.g. a case of subsidence due to an excavation made by a (See Civil Procedure Act, 1833, s. 2.)] deceased predecessor.
Digitized
by Microsoft
398
Measure of damages
842.
a public
body
which
liability to
is
maintain
highway
it
to
its
v.
Abatement
sance
may
and may,
if
upon the
(1591) Cro.
Eliz.
269.
a.
[It seems doubtful whether a person who has unsuccessfully attempted to obtain a mandatory order to destroy an alleged nuisance can afterwards abate it (^Lane v. Capsey [1891] 3 Ch., at p. 416).]
Lord of manor
is,
844.
his
to
common
primt
by an
which
facie, lawful,
but which
in fact,
an excesis
His remedy
by
action.
.!
'
Cooper
V.
S adgrove
Arlett V.
Hope
V.
Marshall (1757) I Burr. 259. Kirkby. (1795) ^ "^^ ^' 4^3Ellis (1827) 7 B. & C. 346. Osborne [i^l^] 2 Ch. 349,
Vi
Digitized
by Microsoft
NUISANCE
845.
399
person
abating a nuisance
must
the
do
so
damage ;W and
he
limits of ''"^'^^
may
not, to
effect
rights of
third parties.^'')
Lodie v. Arnold (1697) 2 Salk. 458. Perry v. Fitzhowe (1846) 8 Q. B. 757. (b) Roberts v. Rose (1865) L. R. i Ex. 8z.
(a)
arises
from an omission,
Notice
to
"^"'^
abate
(*)
unless
(a) the
nuisance
is
caused
by the encroachment
^''^
or,
is
(a)
Lonsdale
V.
Jones
arises
from an
may
is
abate
it
without
notice,^*) unless:
m-
necessary
(a)
it
necessitates
the
;
demolition
^^^
of a
building
which
(b)
it
inhabited
or,
necessitates
the nuisance
is
in the
Digitized
by Microsoft
400
who
is
not liable to an
is
and
the
abatement
not
urgently
necessary.^
(a)
(b)
Davies Davies
v.
v.
Lane
(c)
v.
V.
v.
Capseyll^l]
Ch.,
at p.
415.
Jones Perry
Public
nuisance
848.
person
may
damage from
it
as
would
But
a
him
to bring
is
an action {anU,
caused by the
832
(i).)^*^
the
nuisance
obstruction of
who cannot
^"^
otherwise con-
way may
doing as
(a)
pass
over ^^ or remove
the obstruction
little
damage
v.
a? possible/*^)
Mayor
of Colchester v. Brooke
Winterbottom
[The latter was an unsuccessful action to recover the expenses of removing obstructions from the alleged obstructor. The question of the right to remove the obstructions was not directly discussed.]
Eastern Counties Co. v. Dorling (1859) z8 L. J. C. P. 20Z. Dimes v. Petley (1850) 15 Q. B. 276. Bagshaw v. Buxton Board of Health (1875) I Ch. D., at p. 224, per Jessel, M. R. (d) Campbell Davys v. Lloyd [1901] 2 Ch. 518.
(b)
(c)
Injunction
849.
cretion,
The Court
grant
will,
in
the
exercise of
its
dis-
against
nuisance
an
injunction
(if
necessary)
Digitized
by Microsoft
NUISANCE
mandatory order
(a)
(''^
401
the-
to
restrain
continuance
or
& Coke
H. L. C. 600.
Ch. 287.
London
[1895]
(b)
Daniel
Ferguson [1891] 2 Ch. 27. Fon Joel V. Hornsey [1895] 2 Ch. 774.
v.
[For the general principles upon which the discretion of the Court is exercised in granting or withholding injunctions, see ante^ Section I, Tit. VII, 805-808.]
850.
strain
An
injunction
may
also
be granted to
re- Apprehended
Fleet V. Metropolitan
T.
L. R. 36 1.
[Both approved in A. G. v. Corporation of Manchester [1893] 2 Ch., at p. 91 ; A. G. V. Corporation of Nottingham [1904] i Ch. 673.]
Addendum to Title
It
III
list
would be dangerous
;
to attempt
any exhaustive
nuisances
for
it
is
of specific and
industrial habits,
new examples
list.
:
instances
1.
may be mentioned
Walter v. Selfe (1851) 4 De G. & Sm. 315 (brick-burning). Margate Pier Co. v. Margate Corpn, (1869) 20 L. T. 564 (seaweed). Rapier v. London Tramways Co. [1893] 2 Ch. 588 (stables).
A. G.
2.
V.
Tod-Heatley [1897]
De Held (1851)
v.
2 Sim.
N.
S.
133 (church
bells).
Inchbald
Broder
Polsue
V.
Barrington (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. 388 (circus). Saillard (1876) L. R. 2 Ch. D. 692 (stables).
Digitized
by Microsoft
402
3.
4 M.
Lord Ellenborough in R. v. Vantandillo (18 1 5) 73 (inoculation for small-pox). R. V. Burnett (18 15) ibid., 272 (do.). Crowder v. Tinkler (18 1 6) 19 Ves. 617 (storage of gunpowder). Vaughan v. Menlove (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 468 (storage of hay). Hepburn V. Lordan (1865) 34 L. J. Ch. 293 (storage of jute). Metropolitan Asylums Board v. Hill (1881) L. L. 6 App. Ca. 193
R.
V.
&
S.
(hospital).
4.
Moore (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 184 (pigeon shooting). Walker v. Brewster (1867) L. R. 5 Eq. 25 (outdoor fete). Bellamy v. Wells (1891) 39 W. R. 158 (boxing club). Barber v. Penley [1893] 2 Ch. 447 (theatre).
[The obstruction must be permanent; the mere passing by of crowds on their way to a place of entertainment is not sufficient {Inchbaldv. Robinson (1869) L. R. 4 Ch. App., at p. 396).]
5.
Lyons
Wilkins [1899]
M.
R.).
[This form of nuisance must now be considered in connection with the Trades Disputes Act, 1906, s. 2; which practically abolishes it, if peacefully conducted, so far as industrial disputes are concerned.]
Fouling or substantially diminishing a (natural) water supwith the right of lateral or vertical support of
its
6.
ply, or interfering
land in
original state,
v.
Rowbotham
(vertical
Wilson (1857) 8 E.
&
B., at pp.
and
lateral support).
Bonomi w. Backhouse (1859) ^- ^- ^ ^' ^' P- 654> per curiam (do.). Swindon Waterworks Co. v. Wilts bfc. Canal Co. ( 1 875) L. R. 7 H. L. 704 (stream of water). Ormerod v. Todmorden Mill Co. (1883) II Q. B. D. I 55 (do.). A. G. V. Conduit Colliery Co. I Q. B., at p. 312 (vertical [1895J
support J.
(Where
it is
said that
no
aptual
Sed
qucere.)
Digitized
by Microsoft
NUISANCE
(i)
403
Every riparian proprietor has a right to the reasonable user of the water flowing past his land, whether such user does or does not interfere with the enjoyment of a lower riparian
proprietor
Miner v. Kingsdown.
(ii)
Gilmour
(1858)
iz Moo.
P.
C,
at
p.
Every occupier
of land has the right to take water percolating through his land in undefined or unknown channels, and to drain his land ; even though the effect be to deprive adjacent occupiers of water or support.
Chasemore
Popplewell
v.
V.
Richards (1859) 7
H.
L. C. 349.
Hodgkinson (1869) L. R. 4 Ex. 248. Bradford Corporation v. Ferrand [1902] 2 Ch. 655. Salt Union v. Brunner Moi[l9o6] 2 K. B. 822. English V. Met. Water Board [1907] I K. B. 588.
[But the right to take percolating water does not cover (a) the it {Ballard v. Tomlinson (1885) 29 Ch. D. 1 15) or (b) the right to abstract silt from the defendant's soil in such a way that it will cause the plaintiff's land to subside {Jordeson v. Sutton., i^c. Gas Co. [1899] ^ C^' 217. SembUj in this case, the defendants took away silt from the plaintiff's soil).]
right to foul
7. prejit
Dalton V. Angus (1881) L. R. 6 App. G. E. Ry. V. Goldsmid (1884) L. R. 9 Fitzgerald v. Firbank [1897] 2 Ch. 96 Brocklebank v. Thompson [1903] z Ch.
Colls V.
Home
&
355
(local rights).
1
79
(lights).
Jolly V.
(do.).
the rule
is
indisputable.)
8.
Causing obstruction
to,
or public bridge. Barnes v. Ward (1850) 9 C. B. 392 (unfenced area). Abbot V. Macfie (1863) 2 H. & C. 744 (cellar flap). Hill v. New River Co. (1868) 9 B. & S. 303 (water spout). Benjamin v. Storr (1874) L. R. 9 C. P. 400 (obstruction). Tarry v. Ashton (1876) I Q. B. D. 314 (sign-board). (But a highway may be dedicated to the public subject to what would otherwise be a nuisance {Fisher v. Prowse (1862) 2 6. & S. 770).)
Digitized
by Microsoft
404
[There
mere non-feasance
defendant.
{e.
g.
omission to repair)
unless
it
can be shown
upon the
Men of Devon (1788) z T. R. 667. Cowley V. Newmarket Local Board [iSgz] A. C. 345. Maguire v. Liverpool Corporation [1905] I K. B. 767.
Russell V.
Trbbably the liability of a person bound to repair ratione tenurae comes under the above rule. {Rundle v. Hearle [1898] 2 Q. B., at And see also pp. 86 and 87.)] p. 89.
9.
plaintiff's land.
Baten's Case (161 1) 9 Co. Rep. 53 b. (eaves-drip). Fletcher v. Rylands (1868) L. R. 3 H. L. C. 330 (flood water).
Snow
10.
dition.
v.
(rain water).
fall
Cheetham
was
as to
Todd v. Flight (i860) 9 C. B. N. S. 377. Nelson V. Liverpool Brewery Co. (1877) L. R. 2 C. P. 311 (where there was no doubt as to the liability of some one).
11.
also
licensed entertainments.
V. V.
12.
indecent literature.
R.
V. Holmes (1853) 3 Car. & K. 360 (indecency). The Queen v. Harris (1871) L. R. i C. C. R. 282 (immorality). Steele v. Brannan (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 261 (indecent literature).
[There
detailed.
are numerous other statutory nuisances which cannot be For a list, see Garrett, Law of Nuisances (3rd. edn.),
pp. 288-372.J
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
An
IV
OTHER
will
lie
TORTS IN RESPECT
by a reversioner or
OF LAND
851.
action
re- Waste
mainderman
Bacon
v.
Jfoodhouse
[The rule was extended to copyhold estates by Blackmore v. White [1899] I Q- S- 293 which, however, treats it as an action on an implied contract.]
;
(b)
Baxter v. Taylor (1832) 4 B. & Ad. 72. Roberts v. Holland [1893] I Q. B. 665. Mayfair Property Co. v. Johnston [1894]
cases
therein cited.
[Such an action would not be an action of trespass, because the would not have been infringed. As to what constitutes waste, see post., Book III. Various other remedies are open to the reversioner or remainderman in respect of waste but it is conceived that the ordinary action for damages would still lie {Woodhouse v. Walker., ubi jk/>.).]
plaintiff's possession
;
852.
own
purposes, brings
Dangerous
'" ^'"""^
on land
prima
do mischief
all
if it
escapes,
is
answerable for
is
damage
to
its
the
land
of another which
the consequence of
escape.
Digitized
by Microsoft
406
was due
God"
(a)
{vis major)^"^
Tubervilv. Stamp
{i6()j) i Salk. 13 (fire).
Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) L. R. 3 H. L. 330 (water). Crowhurst v. ^mershmi Burial Boari (1878) 4 Ex. D. 5 (poisonous
"
trees).
Smith V. Gidiy [1904] 2 K. B. 448 (boughs of trees). [In the report of this case it is not stated that the defendants had planted the trees. But, if it were not so, the decision would be inconsistent with principle, and with the decision of another Divisional Court in Giles v.
Nichols
V.
[The rule is not confined to cases of damage to land {Miles v. But the protection Forest Rock Co. (191 8) T. L. R. 500). afforded by the Fires Prevention Act, 1774, s. 86, to the man on whose land a fire " accidentally " begins, Applies, provided the fire is really " accidental " {Musgrove v. Pandelis [1919] 2 K. B. 43).]
XXXIV
S/anJer of
'**^^
853.
lies nies/'')
An
action for
against a person
who
title
damages and an injunction W maliciously and falsely deexistence or soundto property in land,
the
plaintiff
actual
damage
'^^
injured, in so far as
been caused
to his estate.^
(a)
Leslie v.
5.
Cave (1888)
II
T. L. R. 584;
affd.
on appeal, VIII
T. L, R.
(b)
(c)
Dickenson (1590) 4 Co. Rep. 18 a. Dickenson, uhi s'up. Malachy v. Soper (l 836) 3 Bing. N. C, at p. 384, per Tindal, C.J. (d) Hargrove v. Le Breton (1769) 4 Burr. 2422. Ravenhill v. Upcott (1869) 20 L. T. 233.
Gerard Gerard
v. v.
(e) (f)
Hatchard
Pitt V.
Pater
v.
Baker (1847)
C, B. 831.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
III
TITLE
TRESPASS
is
TO GOODS
direct
any
infringement
Definition
by means of an
asportation^") or other
is
physical
is
invasion ;W
intentional/'*)
(a)
or
not
'Hartley v.
Moxham
(b)
L. N. W. Ry. Co. (1849) 4 Exch. 580. Bushell V. Miller (17 18) I Stra. 128. FouUes V. Willoughby (1841) 8 M. & W. 540. Burroughes v. Bayne (l86o) 5 H. & N., at p. 30I.
Sharrod
v.
(1842)
Q.
B. 701.
'.
\
^
Kirk
V.
Gregory (1876)
Ex. D. 55.
[The
(c)
technical
name
was Trespass
de bonis asportatis.]
Wright
V.
Ramscot (1667)
Wms.
Saund. 82.
Dand
(d)
Covell V.
Laming (1808)
Camp. 497.
[But where the alleged injury, though consequent upon the defendant's conduct, was caused by forces over which he had no control, and was not the result of his negligence, there is no act on
his part, and, consequently,
no
liability.
855. Subject to the exceptions mentioned in 858, 859, 860, and 862 {post), the plaintiff, in an action for
Action by
f"""""'
Digitized
by Microsoft
4o8
trespass to goods,
when
the defendant
Smith
V.
Milles (1786)
Young
V.
[A
to be
still
person whose goods have been distrained for rent is deemed in possession of them for the purposes bf the action of
McCle.
&
Yo.,
at
p.
1I8, per
Hullock, B.J
Custody of
servant
856. Goods
servant
who
them
and the
if
he does anything
to a servant
on behalf of
his master
by a
;
the servant
until they
by him
'
to his master's
v. Iffilkins{i
v.
(a)
^.
ySg)
Leach, 5Z0.
at p.
Hopkinson
borough, C.
(b)
(c)
J.
Owen,
52.
to
R. R.
V.
Waite (1743)
I
I
Leach, 28.
y.
Reed (1854)
meet
this difficulty
introduced.
And
see
Moore
v.
Robinson
Digitized
by Microsoft
TRESPASS TO GOODS
857.
his
409
Bailor and
"'
A bailor of goods cannot bring Trespass against bailee W unless the bailee determines the bailment
;
by breaking
(a)
bulk/'')
R
R. R.
V. V.
V.
Smith (1836) i M. C. C. 473. Goodbody (1838) 8 C. & P. 665. Cole (1847) 2 Cox, C. C. 340.
5, per Brian,
R. V. Hey (1849) T. & M. 209. (b) Y. B. 13 Edw. IV (1473) fo. 9, pi. R. V. Cornish (i^S4) Dears. 425.
C.
J.
who
originally ob-
deemed
V.
R.
1901.]
858.
Bailor and
'
''""g^''^
(""^
Lotan White
v.
V.
[The
bailee
of
can sue does not, of course, deprive the obvious right to bring the action.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
4IO
trustee
859.
trespass in respect of
them against
third parties
though
is
in occupation of them.
1 1
Morris (1852)
C. B. 1015.
way of mortgage, upon permit the assignor to hold the goods until default, the assignee may maintain trespass a^irist a third party before default for the mere holding of the assignor is consistent with the assignee's legal possession [White v. Morris, ubi sup.) But if the assignment contains a legal proviso (expressed or implied) that the assignor shall retain possession until default, the assignee cannot sue in trespass until default is made {Wheeler v. Montefiore (1841) 2 Q* B. 133; Bradley v. Copley (1845) i C. B. 685; Barker v. Furlong [1891] 2 Ch., at pp. 179, 180). Apparently, therefore, when the assignment is a bill of sale under the Act of 1882, the assignee cannot sue in trespass before the happening of default, or other cirassigned by
trust
cumstance mentioned
possession.]
in
s.
him
to take
Personal
representative
860.
An
latter' s
pfbbate or
letters
of administration.
Tharpe v. Stallwood (1843) 5 M. & G. 760. Kirk V. Gregory (1876) I Ex. D. 55.
[The
trespasses
committed during the lifetime of the deceased stands on is dealt with in Section I, Tit. VI, 786,
Sheriff
861.
sheriflf
f,.
a writ of
fa.
who has seized goods in execution of may bring Trespass against any one
V.
who
Snow (1670)
Wms.
Saund, 47.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TRESPASS TO GOODS
411
[The common law remedy of a distrainor, if the goods seized by him have been wrongfully interfered with, is by the actions of Rescous or of Pound-breach, according to the circumstances. In the case of a distraint for rent, the distrainor has also the special
of an action on the 2 W. & M., st. I. (1690), c. 5, s. 4. The goods being in the custody of the law, the distrainor could not bring trespass (R. v. Cotton (1751) Parker, 10 1 ; Whitby v. Roberts
remedy
(1825) McCle.
&
Yo. 107).]
entitles
him
Owner
of
^'^""'^ *'"
&
Ad. 831.
[The
last case
:
proposition
bring Trespass.
Irish
case of
R.
v. Clinton
(1869)
Ir.
R. (C. L.)
Finder
sufficient to
person without
jus
tertii
and the
latter
cannot
set
up a
he
acted under
(a)
Armorie
Bridges
v.
v.
Delamirie (1722)
Stra.
505.
J.
Hawksworth (1851) 21 L.
;
Q.
B. 75.
is
much
clear that
that of a
mere wrong-doer
Digitized
by Microsoft
412
them {Blades
(b)
(c)
of Trespass against the owner of the goods^ who has a right to take v. Higgs (1865) 20 C. B. N. S. 214).]
Wbodson
v.
Nawton (1727)
2 Stra. 777.
Colwill V. Reeves
Moore
V.
the
(d)
Jeifries v.
&
B., at p.
806.
Receiver
864.
person
who
receives
goods from a
tres-
was a participant
Y. B. 21 Edw. IV (.1481) fo. 74, pi. 6, per Brian, C. V. Austin (1595) Owen, 70. Badkin v. Powell (1776) 2 Cowp. 476.
Day
[It
was
to
meet
ing stolen
The
recipient
is,
Loss of goods
plaintiflF
in
an action of Trespass
goods;
prima
facie
but
if,
as
between the
parties, the
damages
is
limited to the
Heydon's &' Smith's Case (1611) 13 Co. Rep., Sowell V. Champion (1 837) 6 A. & E. 407.
at p. 69.
The
(b)
fFinkfield
Brierley v. Kendall
Toms
[By the
Trespass de
V.
Civil
s.
bonis asportatis^
if
give damages in the nature of interest, over and above the value of the goods at the time of seizure.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TRESPASS
866. In
all
TO GOODS
413
of
measure of damages
of the defendant's
""""^^
But
if
the
trespass
was
accompanied by circumstances of
the jury-C*)
(a)
plaintiff recovered
insult or
contumely,
Thompson v. Pettitt (1847) 10 Q. B. loi. &r more than the value of the goods.)
(In this
case
the
Gilbertson v. Richardson (1848) 5 C. B. 502. Keene v. Dilke (1849) 4 Exch. 388. Moore V. Drinkivater (1858) I F. & F. I 34. (b) Brewer v. Dew (1843) 11 M. & W. 625. Doss V. Doss (1 866) 14 L. T. N. S. 646 (P. C),
867.
As an
Replevin
action of Replevin
But
if
he adopts
Trespass
(a)
this
is
barred. C")
v.
Shannon
Shannon (1804)
Sch.
&
Lef. 324.
George v. Chambers (1843) 11 M. & W. 149. Mennie v. Blake (1856) 6 E. & B. 842. (b) Gibhs V. Cruikshank (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 454.
is
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Definition
II
CONVERSION
possession/*")
OF GOODS
another person
the tort
is
868. The unjustifiable exercise of an act of ownership over specific goods/*) of which
constitutes
right
thus
goods
an action of
(a)
Higgs
Orton
V.
V.
746.
,
Aid. 652. Moss Q. B. III. (This was not a case of Conversion ; but the arguments employed would apply.)
Butler (1822) 5 B. V. Hancock [1899] 2
&
of
this {Miller v.
Wilhraham v. Snow (1670) 2 Wms. Saund. 47 (and notis thereto). Biddulph V. Ather (1755) 2 Wils. 23. Gordon v. Harper (179Q 7 T. R. 9. Lord V. Price (1874) L. R. 9 Ex. 54.
[The/" right to possession " which is necessary to found an action of Trover is often described as a "; special property " in the goods. This is a most unfortunate expression for in one of the best known cases it is expressly laid down that the term " special property includes interests which do not carry the right to possession, and
;
which, therefore, are not sufficient to found actions of Trover. (See Webb V. Lawrence (1797) 7 T. R., at p. 398, per Lawrence, J.) On the other hand, a person whose goods have been distrained for rent can sue a third party in Trover {Turner v. Ford (1846) 15
M.
&W.
212).]
Cooper V. Chitty (1756) I Burr. zo. Henderson v. Williams [1895] I Q. B. 251. Rhodes V. Monies [1895] I Ch. 236. (It would seem that if, as between plaintiff and defendant, the defendant's act has not deprived the plaintiff of the full value of the goods, the measure of damages is the loss actually suffered by the plaintiff {Chinery v. Viall (l 860) This case shows incidentally that a bailee may even 5 H. & N. z88). maintain Trover against his bailor who has improperly deprived him of pos(c)
Digitized
by Microsoft
CONiVERSION OF GOODS;)
I
415
,
session.
(See also Roberts v. Wyatt (1810) 2 Taunt. ?68.) By the Civil Procedure Act, 1833,3. 29, the jury may in all cases of trover give damages in the nature of interest over and above the value of the goods.)
[The action of Trover acquired its name from the original style of declaration, which alleged that the plaindfF was lawfiillyi possessed of certain goods as of his own property, and casiially lost the said goods, and that the same came to the defendant's hands by finding (trouver). This averment ,of loss and finding ultimately became fictitious, and could not be disputed but the name survived, not only for this action, but for the cognate action of Detinue (post.
'
Tit. III. And see Cooper v. Chitty (1756) i Burr. 20). Since the abolition of the necessity for this averment by the Common Law Procedure Act, 1852,8. 49, the term "trover" has tended See ^urroughes v. to be superseded by the term '^'conversion." Bayne (i860) 5 Hi N., at p. 301, per Martin, B.]
&
869.
It
is
whether
the
defendant
acquired
possession
of,
the
'"''
'
'
was
Chitly (1756) i.Burr., at p. 31., (If the defendant's original who adopts this form of action is said to
"waive the trespass." If the original kakidgi.was lawful, the plaintiff is required to prove a formal demand of possession and a refijsal ; unless there is other distinct evidence of conversion (Bruen v. Roe (1667) Sid. 264; Robertsv. Wyatt (1810) 2 Taunt, 268 ; Lwell v. Martin (1813) 4 Taunt.,
at
p.
801
I, p.
167).
''i"
'
'idj ^
'
' '
'i:.-
i'
''
A
I
870.
5 *
An
fr/>at
868, '
means some
"""x""'/"
conversion
with the
rights]
of
the
plaintiff.
;
J.,
[1R92J
.
<^\
rtW>->
Q.
B., at
502.)
rtv)
,-,?,
Barker
v.
Furlong [1891]
it
2 Ch., at p.
181.
^,,^
In particular,
includes:
\i
.z \'
Digitized
by Microsoft
4i6
(i)
goods
Ogden (1591) Cro. Eliz. 2 1 9. Atkinson (1723) I Str. 576. Phflpott V. Kelley (1835) 3 A. & E. 106. Gurr V. Cuthbert (1843) I? L. J. Exch., 3,09.
Mulgrave
v.
Richardson
v.
(ii)
mere damaging) pf
(iS^j)
Exch. 431.
(iii)
pass
C')
possession
(a)
,
(1851) 7 Exch. ijz. Fowler (1875) L. R. 7 H. L. 757. Hiort V. L. '& N.,W. Ry. Co. (1879) 4 Ex. D. 188. (b) Syeds v.' Hdf {17^1) 4 T. R. z6o. Devereux v. Barclay (1819) z B. & Aid. 70Z.
Penn
v. Bittleston V.
Hollins
Stephenson v. Hart (l8z8)-4 Bing. 476. Wyld^y. Pickford (1 841) 8 M; & W. 443.
(iv)
charging
of the
goods;
!
Piuihtei V.
Montis (1868) L. R.
C. P. 268.
Mulliner
v.
Florence (1878) L. R. 3
Q. B. D. 484.
he pledges the goods on which v. Davies (1805) East, 5 V Gurr v. Cuthbert (1843) 12 L. J. Q. B. 309; Donald 7 v.^ Suckling (186^) L. R. I Q. B. 585.)]
lienor
is
[A
guilty of conversion if
he has a lien;
a pledgee
is
not.
{McCambie
a cheque or
bill
by a banker
title,
under
Arnold V. Cheque Bank (1876) I C. P. D. 579. Fine Art Society'v. Union Bank (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 705. Kleinwort Sons Co. Comptoir National [1894] i Q. B. 157. Macbeth, V. N. S. W. Bank [1908] A. C. 137.
& y
Digitized
by Microsoft
CONVERSION OF GOODS
But a mere bargain and
sale,
417
is
by which property
(b)
Lancashire Wagon Co. v. Fitzhugh (l 86 1 ) 6 H. & N. 502. Consolidated Co. v. Curtis [1892] 1 Q. B., at p. 498. Fouldes V. Willoughhy (1841) 8 M. & W. 540. Fowler V. Hollins (1872^ L. R. 7 Q. B., at p. 629. England v. Cowley (1873) L. R. 8 Exdh. 126.
871 .
A
Rigg.
title
is
v.
which
relates
back
Re/atia "^
conversion
Balme
sufficient to
maintain Trover.
Hutton (1833) 9 Bing. 471. E. of Lonfdale (1857) I H. & N. 923. Goodman v. Boycott (1862) 2 B. & S. I (approved in Blades V. Higgs (1865) 20 C. B. N. S. 214). Bristol Bank v. M. R. Co. [1891] 2 Q. B. 653. (But Goodman v. Boycott v/as an action of Detinue.)
V.
[^are
Whether
Bailors
'
and
may
may
Burton V. Hughes (1824) 2 Bing. 173. Nicholls V. Bastard (1835) 2 C. M. & R. 659. Manders v. Williams (1849) 4 Exch. 588.
The
may
maintain Trover
is
Finders
mere wrong-doer
Armorie
Bridges
(*)
but he
liable
to the
owner
if
(a)
Delamirie (1722)
Str.
505.
L.
J.
(b)
Hawksworth (1851) 21
Q. B. 75.
P 2
Digitized
by Microsoft
4t8
Mere wrong'''
'
874.
beeii
(1863)
3 B.
&
S. '566.
.v:
-x.
CONVERSION OF GOODS
if
419
he acted only
it
in a
justifiable if
(a)
Hollins
V.
Consolidated Co.
Mansell
(b)
Valley Printing Co. [1908] Carey (1852) 11 C. B. 977. Hollins V. Fowler, uhi sup., at p. 767.
v.
Ch. 567.
Heald
v.
877. The
goods
is
defendant's
itself a
refusal
to
;
deliver
not in
conversion
but
it
prima
^'^"'''
Isaack v. Clarke (16 1 5) z Bulst. 306. Mires V. Solebay (1677) 2 Mod. 242. (b) Alexander v. Southey (1821) 5 B. & Aid. 247. Verrall v. Robinson (1835) z C. M. & R. 495. Faughan v. Watt (1840) 6 M. & W, 492. Acraman v. Cooper (1 842) 10 M. & W., at p. 593. Rushworth v. Taylor (1842) 3 Q. B. 699.
[A plaintifF in Trover who relies on demand and refusal must prove either (i) that the defendant has it in his power to give up the goods, <' or (2) has represented - that he has such power, (W or (3) that he has disabled himself by his own wrong from giving up the goods/")
(a) sup.,-
Smith
v.
v.
Toung (1808)
Camp. 439;
Carey (1852) 11 C. B. 977. (b) Seaton v. Lafone (1887; 19 Q. B. D. 68. (c) Bristol Bank v. M. R. Co. [1891] 2 Q. B.,
Heald
at pp.
663-664.]
878. Subject
to
the rules
affecting negotiable
fide
in- Purchaser
pur-
had no
is
guilty of conversion,
Digitized
by Microsoft
420
if
title
('')
in
which such a
sale
or pledge
(a)
1
'
Bills
Burr.
(b)
452
s. 38 (3); Miller 899] 2 Q. B. 1 1 1. Cooper v. Willomatt (1845) I C. B. 672. Fuentes v. Montis (1868) L. R. 3 C. P. 268. Singer Manfg. Co. v. Clark (1879) 5 ^x. D. 37. Oppenheimer v. Frazer [1907] 2 K. B. 50.
;
of Exchange Act,
Race (1758)
Moss
v.
Hancock
[l
[The
afterwards ratified
where the purchase was made by the if the purchase was by the defendant {Hilbery v. Hatton (1864)
;
2 H.
&
C. 822).]
Sale of
Goods Act, 1893, s. 22. (But even in this case the purhave to restore the goods to the owner, if the title has passed through a thief, and the goods are still in the purchaser's possession (ihid. The purchaser in market overt incurs, s. 24 ; Larceny Act, l86i, s. 100). however, no personal liability, and cannot be sued in Trover if he has parted with the goods before the conviction of the thisi -(Horwood v. Smith (1788) 2T. R. 750).], (d) Sle of Goods Act,. 1893, ss. 21, 23, 25.
(c)
chaser
may
Liability
879.
bailee
is
if
the goods
of
bailee
W
I
The
bailor's
remedy against
him,
(a)
if
any,
v.
Owen
Ross
Lewyn (1672)
V.
Johnson
2825.
Williams v. Gesse (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. (b) Ross V. Johnson, ubi sup. (For the contractual liabilities of the various classes of bailees, see Book II, Part II, sub titt. " Hire," "Loan of
Goods,"
"Deposit," "Carriage.")
Jus
tertii
880.
tertii
set
up a
at
jus
rate
as a defence in
an action of Trover,
any
Digitized
by Microsoft
CONVERSION OF GOODS
as against a
421
;
person
who
in
nor
may
his
a bailee set
up such a defence
set
an action
defendant
by
in
bailor.C")
But
up a jus
tertii;
even
Webb v. Fox (1797) 7 T. R. 391. Northam v. Bowden (1855) II Exch. Jefferies v. G. W. R. Co. (1856) 5 E.
Bourne
v.
&
B. 8oz.
(b)
S. 515. Stonard v. Dunkin (1809) 2 Camp. 344. Gosling V. Birnie (1831) 7 Bing. 339. Crosskey v. Mills (1834) i C. M. & R. 298.
Fosbrooke (1865) 18 C. B. N.
(c)
Elliott V.
Kemp (1840) 7 M. & W. 306. Leake v. Loveday (1842) 4 M. & G. 972. Gadsden v. Barrow (1854) 9 Exch. 514.
881.
full
value oi
Effect of
-^^
^"'""'
g6ods
in the
plaintiff,
as
Robinson (1824) 3 B. & C, at p. 2o6. Shepherd (1846) 3 C. B. 266. BucMand v. Johnson (1854) 15 C. B. 145. (This case appears to decide that judgment in Trover vests the property in the defendant, even without satis&ction. But this extension of the doctrine was expressly repudiated by the same Court in Brinsmead v. Harrison (1871) L. R. 6 C. P. 584 ; ibid. 7 C. P. 547.)
[It
must be remembered
that a plaintiff in
Trover
is
now
entitled
defendant.
(See
ante.,
Sect, i, Tit.
VII,
810.)]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Definition
III
DETINUE
in
882.
Any
on demand,
he
is
is
liable to
an action of Detinue,
which
thereof,
and
to
pay damages
tion.W
and
is
it.C')
Clements v. Flight (1846) 16 M. & W. 42. Eherles Hotels v. Jonas (1887) 18 Q. B. D., at p. 466, per Lord
Esher,
(b)
M.
R.
v.
Clark (1615) 2 Bulst., at p. 308. (One consequence of Hewitt (1831) I Cr. & J: 565. that the, period of limitation only begins to run against the plainthis.rulek tiff frtfm the date of his (first) demand against the defendant and the latter's
Jsaack
Gledstatie v.
:
refusal
'{Wilkinson v.
B. 468).)
Verity
(1871) L. R. 6 C.
P.
206;
Miller v. Dell
[1891]! Q.
[The nature of the action of Detinue has often been the subject of discussion by the Courts (Cf. Isaack v. Clark^ ubi sup. ; Gledstane V. Hewitt, ubi sup.; Walker v. Needhqm (1841) 3 M. & G. 557; and Bryant v. Herbert (1878) 3 C. P. D. 389). And even Parliament itself has, at different times, taken different views on the subject. (Cf. Common Law Procedure Act, 1852, Sched. B (29), and County Courts Act, 1850, s. 11.) The truth appears to be, that Detinue was a variety of the ancient action of Debt, which was itself originally in the nature of a real action, to recover specific chattels, but, owing partly to historical, partly to economic, causes, came early to be treated as a personal action, generally founded on contract. As a natural consequence of this origin, various anomalies attached to it; one being that, until 1833, a claim in Detinue could generally be met by the primitive defence known as " wager of law," a defence not available against the action of Trespass, or the more modern actions founded on the Statute of Westminster the Second (" Case "). Hence Detinue tended at one time to be superseded
Digitized
by Microsoft
DETINUE
423
by Trover (ante. Title II), which, in many cases, is equally applicable to the facts. But after the defence of "wager of law " had been abolished by s. 13 of the Civil Procedure Act, 1833, there was a revival of Detinue, and, naturally, with some misunderstanding as to its nature. The action is, in fact, useful in cases in which the defendant sets up no claim of ownership, and has not been guilty of
trespass; for,
acquisition
on the
latter point
especially,
it
is
clear that
it
was
was unlawful.
The
typical case
was
that in
which a
bailor sued his bailee to recover the goods bailed (detinue sur bail-
; and remained the formal assumption in every action of Detinue; though at an early date the allegation of bailment became a mere matter of form, which could not be denied or " traversed." (See Gledstane v. Hewitt, ubi sup.) But allegations of finding, and even of trespass, were also admitted (detinue sur trover, &c.) ; and thus, as was natural, the plea of " not guilty " was recognised, in addition to the more correct plea of " non detinet." With regard to the latter,
it must be understood merely as a denial of the fact of detention, or as including a denial of the plaintiff's title. The Common Law Rules of Pleading issued in 1834, under s. i of the Civil Procedure Act, 1833, adopted the former view; after which it became necessary for the defendant, if he wished to set up a title adverse to the plaintiff, to plead specially (Richards v. Frankum (1840) 6 M. & W. 420 ; Mason V. Farnell (1844) 12 M. & W. 674). And this distinction (See existing rules of practice. is, in effect, maintained by the R. S. C. 1883, App. D, Sect. VI.) The action of Detinue is now,
apparently, treated as an action of Tort (Trotter v. Windham Esf Co. (1907) XXIII T. L. R. 676); but it may be regarded as doubtful
whether a claim for the return of specific goods (Du Pasquier v. Ctfa?^ry [1903] i K. B. 104) or a claim really arising out of contract (Re Button [1907] 2 K. B. 180) e. g. bailment, would be treated as a claim in Tort merely because it was framed in Detinue.]
in
882
in-
Plaintiff's
means goods
Mason
Nyberg
in
which
the plaintiff
has sufficient
terest to entitle
him
to possession.
p.
v. Farnell
v.
684.
Digitized
by Microsoft
414
Finders
884. Subject to
a sufficient interest to
Armorie
v.
him
to possession.
I
Delamirie (I'jz-z)
Str.
505.
Occupier of land
885. Subject to
886,
the
possessor of land to
sufficient
in-
him
in
to possession of chattels
found
on the land.W
ferent interests
and the
cir-
in
found.C')
(b) Elwes V,
South Staffordshire Water Co. v. Sharman [1896] z Q. B. 44. The Brigg Gas (Jo. (1886) 33 CK. D. 562.
Chattels on
886.
When
a chattel
is
^^
entitled to the
owner
thereof.
Bridges \, Hawkesworth (1851) 21 L.J. Q. B. 75.
[This was an action, of Trover; but. the language of the Court In this case the goods were found on the floor of a shop which the finder had entered as a customer, ^eere : if the finder had been a mere trespasser.]
covers Detinue.
Parting with
fessesston
demand by
Digitized
by Microsoft
DETINUE
person,
425
no defence
Jones
Bristol
V.
to the action.
Dowle (1841) 9 M.
v.
Bank
M.
[The last case also set at rest a doubt which had existed since the decision in Goodman v. Boycott (1861) 2 B. S. i ; and decided that it was no defence that the plaintiff's title had accrued since the
&
in
Jus tertu
own
bailor, set
itj^*")
up a jus
tertii;
unless
or unless the
title
of the
(*=)
Betteley v.
V.
V.
Read (1843) 4 Q. B., at p. 517. Lambert [1891] i Q. B. 318. Bond (1865) 6 B. & S.''225.
Tilbury (1858) 3 H. & N. 534; quoted in Rogers (But Thorne v. Tilbury was an action of Trover.)
V.
Thorne
v.
889.
judgment
in
Eject of
J'''^^'"'"'
him
to exercise his
value
and, if he refuses, may attach him for disobedience. ; 1883, O. XLVIII. r. I.)]
Digitized
by Microsoft
CHATTELS PERSONAL
Action by
reversioner
may
permanent injury
defendant.
Mears
v.
to
his
L. b? S.
1 1
C. B. N.
S.
850.
Infringement
of monopolies
891.
An
^g^j
(intentional or unintentional) of
any patent,
vested
in
registered
trade
mark,('')
or
copyright, W
the plaintiff;
and the
plaintiff's
an injunction
of,
in addition to,
,
and an account
damages.
v.
(a), Patents and Designs Act, 1907, s. 34. (No damages can be obtained against the innocent infringer of a patent granted after ist January,
1908 {iUd.
s.
33)
[1908] I Ch. 443). And an account cannot now,be claimed in an action foi infringement of patent (Patents and Designs Act, 1919, s. 10).
(b)
(c)
Queen v. Halifax [1891] i Q. B., Trade Marks Act, 1905, s. 40. Copyright Act, 1842, s. 15.
for
at p.
796.
[The remedies
pirated copies.
breach of copyright, which are purely statuand even, in certain cases, seizure of the For further particulars, see under " Copyright " threat of proceedings by a patentee (but not by a
XXXII
T. L. R.
up by action
Digitized
by Microsoft
CHATTELS PERSONAL
with due diligence,
427
itself a groun,d of action for damages and an injunction (Patents and Designs Act, 1907, s. 36 ; Craig v. Dowding (1908) 97 L. T. 683) ; and to the latter action bona fides is no defence {skinner v. Shew [1893] i Ch. 413). few trade-marks are still protected, even though not registered (Trade Marks Act, if905,
'
S.42).]
.
.
lies
Violation of
892.
An
action for
against a person
(i)
who
makes use of mate-
'""fi^'""
publishes information, or
rials,
at p.
349.
Lamb
V.
Evans [1893]
Ch. 21?.,
Q. B. 315.
i
Mansel
Manning
[1917]
authority of the
comletters,
composito
tion
the
public at large
Tuck
Caird
V. Priester, ubi sup.
v.
,;
>
,
Sime (1887) L. R. I 2 App. Ca. 326. Macmillan v. Dent [1907] I Ch., at p. 120. [Quare, as to effect of s. 31 of the Copyright Act, 191 1 (abolishing the so-caUed " common law " right), which, however, expressly reserves the jurisdiction to restrain a breach of trust or confidence.]
(iii)
whose
behalf),
he was employed to
tal^e
a pho-
such photograph.
Digitized
by Microsoft
428
S/ander of
's
893.
person
who
of another/*) or his
trade
title
thereto/'')
or concerning the
or
business
of
another,^
which
statements
other/'')
is
cause actual
liable to
the
suit'
an action for damages and an injunction at of the party damaged. The action will surbe proved to have been caused to his
g/h
,
damage
carl
,
-estate.>),
n'r--.
iOJSi.
rr^n V. FiVW (1869) L. R. 4 Q. B. 730. Royal Baking PxnUder Co. v. fFright (1900) 18 R. P. at p. 99 (jier Lord Davey), and p. loi ijier Lord James of Hereford). (b) Newman v. Zachary (1670) Aleyn, 3. Malachy v. Safer (1836) 3 Bing. N. C. 371. Atkins V. Perrin (1862) 3 F. & F. 179. Crampton v. Swete (1888) 58 L. T. 516. (c) Ratcliffe v. Evans [1892] 2 Q. B. 524. .f^ Trollope Sons v. London Federation (1895) 72 L. T. 342.
(a)
C,
(d)
(e)
Hatchard
Mige
''.
'
:.'/..
.'
,.,.;
to,.
the disparagement consists in .threatening ^proceedings for the infringement of a patent, bona fides is no defence {Skinner
V.
[Where
5^w
[1893]
Ch. 413).]
Proprietary
'
"^
*'
Digitized
by Microsoft
CHATTELS PERSONAL
an action
lies
429
damage.
(a)
Exchange Telegraph Co. v. Gregory [1896] I Q. B. 47. National Phonograph Co. v. Edison-Bell Co. [1908] i Ch. 335. Mansell v. Valley Printing Co. [1908] 2 Ch. 441.
[Do these cases amount to anything more than the violation of contractual rights, as to which, see Sect'. V., Tit. IV., 963 ?
(b)
Anon. (1674)
Whitfield
V.
Cowp.,
at
p.
Mansfield.
Hayn
Meux
modern times
But
in
v. Culliford
V.
Hooper
V.
N. W. Ry.
J.
Q.
B. 102.
[The scope of
;
this
owing
vants, innkeepers,
common
is
Where
damage
would be one of
Nuisance.]
[Note on Sections
\
II
and
III.
must, of course, be remembered, that the same facts often to two or more of the torts specified in these Sections, and For that the plaintiff can, therefore, sue on one or all of them. example, the same facts may shew both trespass and nuisance to land, or trespass, conversion, or detinue, in the case of chattels. But the importance of distinguishing between these various torts is that the plaintiff, to succeed, must bring his case within one of them. And, sometimes, it will be better for him to prove one tort than
It
amount
another.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
I'^iOi
BOOK
"art
II
tfi
:
OBLIGATIONS
III (continued)
B TORTS
'
(continued)
SECTION
IV
TITLE
An
TRESPASS
A.
TO THE PERSON
when the defendmenaced or attempted to
lies
Assault
SUB-TITLE
895.
plaintiff,
without the
plaintiff's
in 'such a
way
ground
Mod.
3.
act
at
was deprived of its tortiqus character by the words used; but the the end of the report bear out the statement in the text.)
R. V. St. George (1840) 9 C. & P. 483 (questioned on another point, but not on this, in R. v. Brown (1883) 10 Q. B. D. 381; R. v. Linneker
[igo6] 2
K. B.
99).
"
Innes
&
K. 257.
q'
Mfh
WfeH
J. Ex., at p. 145.
fh
Digitized
by Microsoft
432
(b)
Agnew
(c)
Shoppee. (1828) 3 C. S^ P. 373. Stephens v. Myers (1830) 4 C. P. 439. R. V. 5*. George, uhi sup., at p. 493, per Parke, B. Read V. Coker (1853)13 C. B. 850.
v.
;
Genner Martin
v.
Sparks (1704)
Doug.
73.
&
Hancock (27
New Hamp.
223)
Battery
896.
An
lies
when
on the part
Third party
897.
The
necessarily
prevent
application
896.
of
force
being
meaning of
(Defendant threw lighted squib Scott V. Shepherd (1773) 2 W. Bl. 892. on to third party's stall; third party, to save his goods, threw it on to plainHeld that Tresp^s^ lay.). tiff.
Digitized
by Microsoft
433
Reality of
defendant has been obtained by fraudulent misrepresentation as to the nature of the act complained of,
the defendant
in fact
is
"^""""^
liable in Trespass/*^
But
if
the plaintiff
of,
and consented
the consent
no action
will lie;
even though
material
(a)
facts/''^
Case (1850) Den. C. C. 580. (1877) 2 Q. B. D. 410. (b) Hegarty v. Shine (1878) 14 Cox, C. C. 145 (Irish case). R. V. Clarence (1888) 23 Q. B. D. 23. {R. V. Bennett (1866) 4 F. & F. 1105, is probably wrong.
R. R.
V. V. Flattery
At any
rate
it is
no authority
little
[It
is
seems a
doubtful whether,
when
a criminal offence, consent is always a good defence to a civil action of trespass {Boulter v. Clarke (1747) B. N. P. 16; R. v. Coney (1888) 22 Q. B. D. 534). Of course consent is not always
899.
An
may be
:
justified
justification
was
vol-
it
to the
Hall
Leame
v.
Bray (1803)
3 East, 593).
[It
seems a
is
little
case
really
battery.
doubtful whether the defendant's act in such a But Hall v. Fearnley seems to show
Digitized
by Microsoft
434
that,
fendant's impact
the plaintiff in a
(ii)
wa done by the
herself,
child,^''^
parent,
master, or servant,
^'^^
against
and that
in the
circumstances
(a)
(b)
writers.
Anon. (1440) Y. B. 19 Hen. VI. Mich. pi. 59. Leward v. Baseley (ifx)^ I Ld. Raym. 62. Soj said in Anon. (n. d.) 3 Salk. 46, and adopted by modern
, ,
V. Reynolds (1729), I Str. 953. (In Leward v. Baseley, ubi was said, that a master cbuld not justify for defending his servant, because he could have the action per quod servitium amisit. But this is contrary to the solemn resolution of the Court of Common Bench in 1440 (Y. B. 19 Hen. VI. Mich. pi. 59), and to the opinion of the majority of the Court
(c)
Barfoot
sup.,
it
in
Seaman
(d)
v. Cuppledick (1614) Owen, 150.) Cockroft V. Smith (1705) 2 Salk. 642, per Holt, C. J. Reece v. Taylor (1835) 4 N. &. M., at p. 470.
Blunt
V.
Beaumont (1835) 2 C. M.
&
R. 412.
(iii)
was done
in the
e.
g.:
to
resist
an
illegal
entry
upon land
in the possession
l^eaver v.
of the defendant
Bush (1798)
V.
Polkinhor'n
p.
206 {per
Curiam).
Digitized
by Microsoft
435
a trespasser/*^ or a person
in
making a disturbance
worship (')
common
Harvey
v.
Bridges (1845)
H M- ^ W.
I
Harrison
[It
v.
D. of Rutland [1893]
Q. B.
437. 142.
land by his
was formerly held that a person who enters the defendant's license, and subsequently refuses to leave on demand, becomes a trespasser for this purpose (JVooci v. Leddbitter (1845) 13 M. & W. 838). But this view has been greatly shaken by the decision in Hurst v. Picture Palaces, Li. [1915] i K. B. i.]
(b)
v. Whiting (1840) 9 C. P. 262, per Patteson, J. Webster v. Watts (1847) 11 Q. B. 311. Sealey v. Tandy [1902] I K. B. 296.
Wheeler
&
(c)
How V.
Burton
Planner (1666)
V.
Sid. 301.
M. W. 105. (Probably the authority of a churchwarden for this purpose is confined to the hours of divine service; at other times the
Henson (1842)
10
rector
is
&
v.
Terrington
(1844)
'3
M.
& W.
[But a churchwarden
thinks there will not be
room for others who may wish to attend Timson (i888) 20 Q. B. D. 671). And, generally, before ejecting, the defendant must have requested the plaintiff to Ballard v. leave peaceably {Green v. Goddard (n. d.) 2 Salk. 641
{Taylor
v.
;
Bond
(1837) I Jur. 7); unless the plaintiff himself used force to P. 6; Polkinhorn v. Wright enter {Tullay v. Read (1823) i C.
&
(1845) 8 Q. B. 197.).]
(y)
to
prevent
the
unlawful
seizure
of
fendant;
(The reCuppledjck (1614) Owen, 150. but if a man is entitled to take goods by force (see below), a fortiori he must be allowed to defend
Seaman
is
v.
port
obscure;
force.)
them by
Digitized
by Microsoft
436
to take
chattels
to
the possession of
entitled.
Anon. (1494) Keilwey, 92. Blades V. Higgs (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 713. (This last for the chattels (wild rabbits) had is an extreme case; never been in the possession of the defendant's employer.)
not necessary that the wrongful talking should have been but where the plaintiff has not himself been the trespasser, probably -a request for delivery is necessary before force .is used (Blades v. Higgs, ubi sup.)!\
[It is
by the
,plaintifF;
to justify
an assault
in defence or
force than
(*)
was necessary
be
justified
on such a
(a)
plea;^'')
(b)
Oakes
V.
Wood
(1837) 2
M.
& W.
791.
(iv)
on
whom
was
(**)
the the
was
committed
child,^*^ ward,^'')
apprenticej^") or pupil,
of
the defendant,
by way of
Winterburn v. Brooks (1846) 2 C. & K. 16, Mansell v. Griffin [1908] I K. B., at p. 166. (b) There appears to be no diirect authority for this statement; but the rights of the parent and the guardian are usually spoken of as being And see Prevention of Cruelty to Children Act, 1904, ejusdem generis. s. 28, which is, however, repealed by the Children Act, 1908, s. 134 (3). (c) Penn v. Ward (1835) 2 C. M. & R., at p. 341. (d) Cleary v. Booth [1893] I Q. B. 465. Mansell v. Griffin, ubi sup.
.
(a)
Digitized
by Microsoft
437
[The authority of the schoolmaster is a delegation of that of the and it is not confined to offences committed on the school premises {Chary v. Booth, ubi sup.). A husband has no right to
chastise or imprison his wife; unless, possibly, to imprison her in order to prevent her committing adultery (R. v. Jackson [1891] I Q. B. 671).]
(v)
was committed
lawful
service
for
process
Rose
-v.
905-909),
or
of
(vi)
was necessary
to
&
(vii)
was committed
in
&
F. 28.
J.
Noden
V.
Johnson (1850) 20 L.
Q. B. 95.
[If the disturbance has once ceased, there must be well-founded apprehension of a renewal to justify an arrest (Price v. Seeley, ubi And no other past misdemeanor will justify arrest without sup.). warrant; except under special statutory authority (Fox v. Gaunt (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 798; Mathews v. Biddulph (1841) 3 M. & G. 390). In this respect the powers of a constable do not differ from those of a private person (Bouiditch v. Balchin (1850) 5 Exch. 378; The cases on the Griffin V. Coleman (1859) 4 H. & N. 265). Qucsre: as to point are mostly instances of public disturbance. a breach of the peace in a private place.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
438
(viii)
plaintiff
was a dangerous
to restrain
lunatic
force,
whom
was necessary
than
by
for
force
was
necessary
E.
&
E. 420.
it,
[The law looks with great jealousy on the fact of dangerous lunacy must be
this plea
strictly
cases of urgency, the proper proceeding is order" under the Lunacy Act, 1890, ss. 4-8.]
proved.
Trifling
fljjau/f or
under sections 42 or 43 of the Offences against the Person Act, i86i,W and, after a hearing on the meritSj^*")
has received a certificate of dismissal of the charge,
("=^
by the Court, he
will not
be liable to an action
any consequential
^^^
(b)
(c)
e., of acquittal [Hartley v. Hindmarsh (1866) L. R. I C. P. 553). Offences against the Person Act, 1861, s. 45. (The rule is only applicable where the case has been heard by two justices of the peace;) (e) Masper v. Brown (1876) i C. P. D. 97.
(d)
Digitized
by Microsoft
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
439
Aggravated
^'""''^"
901. In an action for assault or battery, special damage need neither be alleged nor proved ;W but
(subject to
797),
if
alleged,
it
may
aggravation of damages/''^
(a)
be proved in *
{Entick
v.
This
is
Car-
Bourden v. Alloway (1708) 11 Mod. 180. ScoU V. Shepherd (1773) 2 W. Bl. 897.
SUB-TITLE
B.
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
his
own
act, or
by the
Definition
and without
no matter
for
how
he
will
be liable to
an action of
false
damage
(a)
suffered
by the
plaintiff.^')
Wheeler v. Whiting (1840) 9 C. & P. 262. Chivers v. Savage (1856) 5 E. B. 697. (b) Bird V. Jones (1845) 7 Q- B. 742. (c) An action for false imprisonment is an action of Trespass; successful plaintiflP is at least entitled to nominal damages.
&
and a
903.
To
constitute
false
imprisonment,
it
is
not
Contact not
"""'"^y
body of the
plaintiff.
has
Warner
[It
v.
used to be said that every imprisonment included a battery. But that view is now exploded {Emmett v. Lyne (1805) i B. & P. N. R. 255).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
440
Third party
904.
must be
shown
It is
is
arrested by a constable to
v.
whom
or where the defendant has n\,erely signed a charge sheet at the dictation of a constable {Grinham v. Willey (1859) 4 H. & N. 496), or where the plaintiff his been arrested on a magistrate's warrant issued on the inforrnation of the defendant, an action for false imprisonment will not lie against the latter; though an action for malicious prosecution may (West v. Smallwood (1838) 3 M. & W. 418; Brown v.
J.
C. P. 329;
Austin
v.
Dowlirtg (1870)
Parental
authority
905.
entitled
to
it
will
usually consider
wishes
of an
who
has
No
husband
in respect
of the body of
Digitized
by Microsoft
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
his wife;
441
R. R. R.
Manneville (1804) 5 East, 221. Clarke (1857) 7 E. B., at p. 193, per Lord Campbell, C. J. V. Howes (i860) 3 E. E. 332. Re Agar-Ellis (1883) 24 Ch. D. 317.
V. de
V.
&
&
in
Naylor (1820) 5 Madd. 77 (testamentary guardian). Sfhwenck (1845) 14 M. & W. 488 {id.). Re Andrews (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 153 {id.). (c) Guardianship of Infants Act, 1886, s. 5. Re Elderton (1883) 25 Ch. D. 220 (father). Re Turner (1872) 41 L. J. Q. B. 142 (mother). (d) R. V. Clarke, ubi sup., at p. 197. (The age of discretion is fourteen males and sixteen in females {Re Agar-Ellis, ubi sup., at p. 326, per
Wright
V.
Gilbert v.
Brett,
(e)
M.
R.
R.).)
V.
Jackson [1891]
Q. B. 671.
see post,
[For the appointment, rights, and duties of guardians generally, Book IV (Family Law).]
906.
bail
is
whom
Bail
Sheers
v.
Ex
907.
defendant
may
justify
an arrest on the
Suspicion
'f^"y
Digitized
by Microsoft
442
the plaintiff
plaintiff
forthwith
magistrate.^''^
Whether
proved,
amount
is
to reasonable
a question for
is
whether such
facts existed,
a question
it
If the defendant
was a constable,
sufficient
in fact
.M
,1
v.
<
Clayton (1816) Holt, N. P. 478. Beckwith V. Ftlhy (1827) 6 B. C. 635. Broughton v. Jackson (1852) 18 Q. B. 378. (b) bright V. Court (1825) 4 B. & C. 596. (c) If'est V. Baxendale (iS^o) g C.B. J^.
(a)
McCloughan
&
Lister V.
at
p. 535, per
Lord
Hedger (1810)
ubi sup.
Taunt.
13.
V. Filhy,
[A constable or churchwarden of the parish has also a special power to arrest and take before a magistrate any person guilty of the misdemeanor of brawling in church, or other misdemeanor mentioned in section 2 of the Ecclesiastical Courts Jurisdiction Act, 18^69 (see section 3 of that Act).]
Military
off^nce
908.
military officer
is
who
is
Army
(b)
Marks v. Frogley [1898] I Q. B. 888; Army Act, Dawkins v. Lord Rokehy (1866) 4 F. & F. 806.
ss.
Digitized
by Microsoft
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
909. Generally speaking,
justifications
443
for
assault
Justification
^'"'^''
imprisonment;
D. of Rutland [1893]
Q. B.
42.
Appendix
to this Title.]
910. Subject
defendant
Mistake
which,
if true,
would have
is
justified
him
no defence
to
an action
of false imprisonment.
Sinclair v. Broughton (1882) 47 L. T. 170 (P.
C).
APPENDIX
Statutory Powers of Arrest by Private Persons WITHOUT A Warrant
Vagrancy Act, 1824 (5 Geo. IV. c. 83), s. 6 (rogues and vagabonds). Night Poaching Act, 1828 (9 Geo. IV. c. 69), s. 2 (persons destroying game
by
night).
Highway
Act, 1835
(S
&
6 Will. IV.
c. 50), s.
79 (persons committing
s.
certain offences).
Metropolitan Police Act, 1839 (2 & 3 Vict. c. 47), by owners of property). against Act); s. 66 (offenders Prevention of Offences Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. 19),
63 (offenders
11 (indictable
s.
offenders at night). 25 Vict. c. 96), s. 103 (thieves). Larceny Act, 1861 (24 25 Vict. Malicious Injuries to Property Act, 1861 (24 by owners). (persons damaging property
&
&
c.
97),
s.
61
&
25 Vict.
c.
99),
s.
31 (false coiners).
Digitized
by Microsoft
444
112),
s.
7 (previous
Pawnbrokers! Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 93), s. 34 (pawners of stojem goods by pawnbrokers). Licensing Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 94), s. 12 (persons drunk in certain
circumstances).
(36
&
c.
37 Vict.
58),
s.
c.
71)
s.
38 (salmon poachers
(illegal
&
45 Vict.
A(;t,
156 (4)
c.
purchasers of
5 (2)
Regulation of Railways
refusing
name, &c.
by railway
1889 (52
&
53 Vict.
s.
i
57),
s.
(persons
officials).
c.
VIL
28),
Note
In addition to the civil action for damages, a person wrongfully imprisoned may, of course, usually avail himself of the prerogative writ of habeas corpus.
I'l',
.-lUno'O
(^
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
911.
II.
OTHER
who
INJURIES IN RESPECT
OF THE PERSON
person
causes physical
in
harm
is
to
another
Breach of
jl"*'^^
in the circumstances
mentioned
726
liable to
an
action for
damages
Groves
V.
V.
in respect of
such harm.
David
[^uiere
:
Does
912.
intentional
without legal
^^s'lg^nt
^
owed
is
to
liable to
in respect of the
or omission;
trespass.
although the
Bird
v.
Roberts
v.'
v. England (1864) 33 L. J. Q. B. 32I. Clark V. Chamberi (1878) 3 Q. B. D. 327. Wilkinson v. Downton [1897] 2 Q. B. 57. (b) For definition and principles of negligence, see ante, 728-731. Of course an action founded on negligence can be defeated by proof
Davies
(c)
of contributory negligence in the plaintiff ( 732). The justification in such an action would certainly include all cases of justification in an action of Trespass (see ante, 899); and, probably, a good many more. Thus, it has been ruled by judges of eminence that a man is justified in keeping a savage dog, or pladng
I
Digitized
by Microsoft
446
&
at a
mere
tres'
'
mikes (1820) 3
B.
&
Aid. 304.
Giles V. L. C. C. [1904] 2 L.
G. R. 306.
[The form of the action in. this Title would hav^ been Case; and actual damage must therefore be proved. (For the distinction, see Scott V. Shepherd (1773) 2 W.Bl. 892.) ]
Volenti non
fit
to in
injuria
the subject
amount
fit
to consent
i^*"^
volenti
non
'
Ilott V.
Thomas
V.
V.
Q. B. D. 685.
Baddeley
E. Granville .{iSSy) ig
Q.B..D. ^23.
[This
to
is an example of the general rule that consent is a defence an action of Tort {Volenti non fit injuria). But the rule has
There are
dicta to the
consent
is
no defence to a
civil
action founded on a
criminal assault {Boulter v. Clarke (1747) B. N. P. 16; R. v. Coney (1882) 8 Q. B. D., at p. 538, per Cave, J.). Sed quare.}
Common
employment
is
brought by an employee, or
Digitized
by Microsoft
447
wilful act
on
the
not be liable
when
injury occurred, a
the injury to
workman
as defined in 916,^'')
him
arose from:
and
(i)
the
business
itself
of the
defendant,
which
defect
arose
from, or was
to,
not dis-
the negligence
^'^
or,
(ii)
superintendence
superintendence
or,
(^
(iii)
Digitized
by Microsoft
448
bound
to
conform ;^s)
or^
(iv)
done or made
in
or,
defendant,
who had
points,
any
train,
(a)
signal,
locomotive
engine,
or
upon a
railway.^')
Q. B. D.
it
(It
except so far as has been abolished by the Employers' Liability Act {Wilson v. Merry (1868) I H. L. Sc. 326).) (b) Morgan v. Vale of Neath Ry. Co. (1865) L. R. 1 Q. B. 149. Suiainson v. N. E. Ry. Co. (1878) 3 Ex. D. 341. (c) Priestley v. Fowler (1837) 3 M. & W. I. (This decision does not really, as reported, involvfe the doctrine of common employment at all; but it is always treated as if it did.) Hutchinstiri v. York, &c. Ry. Co. (1850) 5 Exch. 343. Bartonshill Coal Co. v. Reid (1856) 3 Macq. H. L. C. 266. (A Scotch case, but expressly decided to be the law of England also.)
(d)
(e)
(f)
s.
I.
I I I
I
(i),
(2). (3).
(i).
(A by-law which has been approved by a Secby any department of the Government, under an Act of Parliament, cannot be deemed improper or defective for the purposes of the
Ibid. ss.
(4), 2 (2).
(g) (h)
Ibid.
retary of State, or
Act.)
(i)
Ibid.
s.
(5).
Digitized
by Microsoft
449
[The key to the Employers' Liability Act, as well as to the Trade Disputes Act, 1906, is to be found in the fact that almost
every clause of both statutes
decision.
is
doctrine of common employment applies, subjectto the Acts, to bar an infant as well as an adult (Bass v. Hendon V. D. C. (1912) XXVIII T. L. R. 317).]
The
915.
An
:
employer
is
deemed,
914, to
has either
(i)
he
"'
'"'Py"^
than ordinary
(ii)
skill
or care
^^^
or,
failed,
engaged,^*") or,
taken part (by himself or his partner) in the employee's task, and thereby caused the
injury ;('^)
or,
(iv)
916.
and "Workma
Q2
Digitized
by Microsoft
450
works under, a
contract
servant.
an
employer,
and
also
any railway
Employers and
Workmen
Act, 1875,
s.
10.
Knowledge
0/ defect
917.
A
1
the
1880;
he was
(3).
17Q. B; D.
122.
[Apparently, the mere fact that the employer was aware, as well workman, of the existence of the defect or negligence, is not sufficient to enable the workman to recover. The workman must
as the
Limits of
fit
injuria {ante,
fTabluty" ^ct
732) are
open
Digitized
by Microsoft
451
on another
at p. 698.
in
Maximum
'^"^'^''''
workman under
limited to the
Act, 1880,
is
amount of
the estimated
920. If a workman, or
sue an employer at
ers' Liability Act,
Alternative
""^^ '"
common
Employ-
and are defeated, he or they cannot afterwards claim against the same employer in respect of the same injury under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906;^*)
though they may,
if
Digitized
by Microsoft
452
good claim
insist
latter
Act,
compensation
And
if
paid to a workman, or his representatives, or any persons claiming by, under, or through him, any statutory
employer
is
such pay-
ment
ers'
in the assessment
Liability Act,
880
been payable
cause of
(a)
to
him or them
in respect
of the same
action/*^)
1906, s. l (2) (b); Edwards v. Godrule applies, jeven if the workman is a minor
The
{Neate v. Electric Ordnance Co. [1906] 2 K. B. 558). But the converse proposition does not hold {Rouse v. Z)jxon [1904] 2 K. B. 628), (b) Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, s. l (4). (But "the action
must have been brought within the time limited for claiming compensation under that Act (Cribb v.Kynoch Ld. (No. 2) [1908] 2 K. B. 551); and the costs incurred by the employer in defending the common law action will be deducted from the compensation payable under the Act {Cohen v. Seabrook (1908) XXV T. L. R. 176).) (c) Employers' Liability Act, 1880, s. 5. (The statutory penalties referred to are probably those imposed by the Metalliferous Mines Regulation Aa, 1872, s. 38, the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1887, s. 70, and the Factory
s.
136.
The
rule
is
1906.
See
s.
(5) of
in
the
Workmen's Compensation
Act,
1906, (see post. Title III) giving an employer a right of subrogation against the person who really caused the injury. But there doe^ not
appear to be any corresponding provision in the Employers' Liability ^are: whether such person would be responsible to the employer in quasi-cantract or otherwise.]
Act, 1880.
Digitized
by Microsoft
453
Limitation
^ '*'"
An
880,
months
880,
s.
4.
[There are various provisions in the Act as to giving notice of and the procedure in actions brought under the statute. (See ss. 4, 6, & 7.) Though in the Act the word "compensation" is used to signify the amount for which the employer is Hable, it has been thought better to use in this Title the more correct term "damages"; to distinguish it from the statutory liability of the employer under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906.]
the injury,
922.
person
animals,^*) or Dangerous
^
harbours dangerous
^"^^
h^rm
784,
and 852,
(*=)
liable to
an action
for
damages
in reis
spect of such
harm;
not
proved.
(a)
May
v. Burdett (1846) 9 Q. B. loi. Filburn \.J'eople's Palace Co. (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 258. Osborne v. Chocqueel [1896] 2 Q. B. 109.
[For the doubt as to whether the doctrine of vis major would apply in such a case, see Nichols v. Marsland (1875) L. R. 10 Ex., at p. 260, and Baker v. Snell [1908] 2 K. B., at-p. 354.]
(b)
Rylands
v. Fletcher
(l868) L. R. 3 H. L. 330.
[There does not seem to be any reported case of this kind in which the damage was to the person. But the principle probably applies, and probably also the exception oi vis major. (See 852.)]
(c)
Hudson v. Roberts (1851) 6 Exch. 597. Rylands v. Fletcher, ubi sup. Barnes v. Lucile (1907) 96 L. T. 680.
Digitized
by Microsoft
454
Mental
923.
not of
itself
sufficient
to
Wilkinson v. Downton [1897] 2 Q. B. 57 (false news). ^Azi [1901] 2 K. B. 669 (careless driving). Janvier v. Sweeney [1919] 2 K. B. 316 (threats).
Dm&m V.
^i,
i-t>('
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
III STATUTORY COMPENSATION FOR ACCIDENTS AND INDUSTRIAL DISEASES ("WORKMEN'S COMPENSA-
TION")
924.
An
employer, as defined in
(to
925,
is
liable to Compensa*'"f^
pay compensation
to a
his
be assessed
in
manner provided
II)
if
workman
he be dead, to
dependants as defined
due
employment,
if
workman
full
wages
work
at
which
;
un-
attributable to the
serious
and
that
it
manent disablement; or
diseases,
it is
unless, in
from the
v.
disease/''^
v.
Johnson
L. (^ S. W. R. [1907]
A. C. 209.
(b)
Workmen's Compensation
i, 8.
Q3
Digitized
by Microsoft
456
[The "industrial diseases" covered by the Act are set out in Sched. Ill thereof. The Secretary of State may add others (s. 8) (6) ) and has done so by orders dated 22nd May, 1907, and 2nd December, 19Q8. No disease, other than those so specified, can be the basis of a claim to compensation under the Act as an "industrial disease"; but what in ordinary language would be called a "disea,se"
;
may be the basis of a claim founded on "accident" (s.' 8 (10); .Brintom V. Turv'ey [1905] A. C. 230; Broderick v. L. C. C. [1908] 2 K. B. 807; Ismay tf Co. v. Williamson [1908] A. C. 437). The principle is: that while nothing can rank as an "accident" which may fairly be considered aS an ordinary consequence of the workman's employment, any unintended and unexpected occurrence may so rank, even though its immediate effect be what is usually called a " disease " {Fenton v. Thorley [1903] A. C. 443). Though
the' " course of the employment " is not co-extensive with the existence of the relation of employer and workmen {Davidson v. Officer [191 8] A. C. 304), nevertheless a workman may b.eientitled to compensation iti respect of an accident which occurred when he was
& Co.
v.
Redford [1920]
"Employer"
925.
An
924, in-
who has
entered into a
workman
ser-
workman
tq another person
whom
the work-
man
latter is
deemed,
workman
whilst he
is
working
for
When
the claim to
compensation
compensalast
who
em-
Digitized
by Microsoft
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
ployed
the
457
workman during
to
the
period
of twelve
months previous
(a)
K. B.
173.
(b)
(c)
Workmen's Compensation
Ibid.
s.
Act, 1906,
s.
13.
(There are various detailed provisions concerning the shifting of this prima facie liabiHty, and the contribution of various employers towards the compensation payable; for which see s. 8 (i) (e) (i)8 (i)
(c).
())
926.
"workman,"
who has
way of manual
word includes
the sea-service
vice
^''^
The
to
and apprentices
and apprentices
(other than
fishing vessel
remunerated by shares
of such vessel)
members of the crew of a ship registered in the United Kingdom, or of a British ship of which the managing owner or manager resides, or has his principal place of business, in the United Kingdom, and also pilots to whom Part X of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, applies.
(i)
who
But
it
ex;
pounds
is
a year
(ii)
of a casual
and who
is
employed otherwise
Digitized
by Microsoft
458
(iii)
member of a
police force
(iv)
an outworker;
(v) a
member
in his house/*)
(a) Probably this contfblling clause limits the whole application of the Act to persons who are technically in the position of " servants" as distinct from independent contractors, e. g., architects, managers, and the like. {Wattes V. Franco-British Exhibition (1909) XXV T. L. R. 441; Simmons V. Heath Laundry Co. (1910) XXVI T'. L. R. 326.) For the distinction see ante, Bk. II, Pt. II, 454, and Bk. II, Pt. Ill, 769, 770, and the cases decided on the Act of 1897, c g. Simpson v. Ebbw Vale [1905] i K. B. But a professional football 453; Bagnall v. Levinstein [1907] I K. B. 531. player is a "workman" for the purposes of the Act {Walker v. Crystal Palace Club [1910] I K. B. 87). (b) The provisions relating to industrial diseases in the Act have no Co., [1909] 2 K. B. 529). application to seamen {Curtis v. Black (c) Does this refer to the remuneration payable, by the employer against whom the claim is made; or to the remuneration earned by the claimant from all sources ? The latter view would lead to strange results; but there is nothing in the Act to exclude it ; and, in assessing compensation, it is actually adopted (Act, Sched. I, (2) {b)). (d) It seems clear that the word "employment" in this clause refers, not to the general character of the claimant's occupation, but to the contract of employment between him and the employer against whom the claim is made {Hill v. Begg [1908] 2 K. B. 802; Dewhurstv. Mather [1908] 2 K. B. 754.) The last case shows that employment, though intermittent, may yet be regular. (e) Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, ss. 7, 13.
/Alternative
927.
When
.
.
Workman has
. .
remedies
respect or
mjury agamst
may
but he
will
And
if
he obtains compensation
from
his
Digitized
by Microsoft
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
employer, the latter
is
459
entitled
to
be indemnified by
any
third
person against
whom
the
workman might
such injury.
s.
in respect of
Workmen's Compensation
Act, 1906,
6.
[It sliould be noted that the method of calculating the amount payable to the workman may be quite different in the two cases, and may consequently lead to different results. Is the indemnity recoverable from the third person by the employer limited to. the amount for which the former would be liable to the workman ?]
928. Proceedings
to recover statutory
compensation
is
Notice of
l"i^"
its
workman
made
has voluntarily
the
employment
for
in
the
daim
compensation
accident,^*) or of the
workin,
But want
of,
or defect or inaccuracy
;
if
the employer
not prejudiced by
or
if it,
In the case of " industrial diseases," the disablement from earning wages, or suspension frqm the usual employment, is to be reckoned as the occurrence of the accident (s. 8 (i) (iii) (a), 8 (4)). For the special case of "workmen" lost at sea, see s. 7 (i). (b) Quare: of the employer or the workman, or either ?
full
(c)
Workmen's Compensation
Act, 1906,
s.
2.
stat- Occident
1
ute,^')
occurring
abroad
Digitized
by Microsoft
460
workman
(a)
e.
Workmen's Compensation
v.
Act, 1906,
s.
7.
(b)
Tomalin
Contracting
out
exempting
an employer
to
;
from
his
any of
unless the
by
the
workman
affected, in
3.
[No such scheme will be sanctioned if it contains an obligation on the workman to join the scheme as a condition of being hired, or if it does not contain provisions enabling him to withdravfr from the scheme (Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, s. 3).]
Sub-contracting
931
Where
a contractor to do the whole or any part of the work undertaken by him, the undertaker
is
liable (alternatively
in
or about premises
^^^
by the undertaker, or on, or in, or about premises on which the undertaker has undertaken to
execute the
ately
work
as
if
the
employed by him.
is
pensation
calculated
by reference
Digitized
by Microsoft
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
of the
461
workman under
provides
his
in question
agricultural,
and the
workman
(a)
so employed/"^
(b)
(c)
Mulroony v. Todd [1909] i K. B. Andrewes [1908] 2 K. B. 567. Workmen's Compensation Act, igo6, s. 4.
s.
13;
165).
Andrewes
v.
[The undertaker (in the section called the "principal") is entitled by any person liable independently of this provision (Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, s. 4 (2)). It seems doubtful whether the workman can sue both principal and contractor under this section, or whether he must elect between them {Mulroony v.
to be indemnified
p.
169).]
liability
is
Insurance
an arrangement with
company,
commences to be wound up, any workman to whom any statutory compensation is due from such employer
acquires the rights of such employer against the insurers
;
liability
less
may
[Claims to statutory compensation up to 100 are payable in bankruptcy and liquidation, where the employer has not insured {Ibid. s. 5 (3) (4)). The section does
priority to ordinary debts in
Digitized
by Microsoft
462
not apply to a company going into voluntary liquidation for the purpose of being reconstructed or amalgamated (s. 5 (5)).]
"Depend-
whom
statutory compensation
may be
grandstep-
obtained (see
relatives,
viz.
the wife,
husband,
parents,
parents,
step-parents,
children,
grand-children,
children, brother,
sister,
half-brother,
and
half-sister
s.
13.
A posthumous child, even though illegitimate, can claim as a dependant {Williams v. Ocean Colliery Co. [1907] 2 K. B. 422 ; Schqfield v. Orrdl Colliery Co. [1909] A. C. 433). The existence of " dependancy " is a question of fact \New Monchton
Collieries V. Keeling [i^ii]
A. C. 6^8).]
.',
Maximum
7;^^""^'^'
tion
'
934. The amouut of statutory compensation recoverable under this Title is assessed with reference to the
average earnings ^^^ of the
workman
limited to three
hundred pounds
it
in the event
of his
incapacity only,
may
"Earnings"
is
a larger
and'
may
include such
v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
463
Spiers bf Pond, LJ. [1908] i K. B. 766), and board and lodging' {Dothie v. Macandrew [1908] I K. B. 803; Rosenqvist v. Bowring [1908] 2 K. B. 108). For the proper method of computing " aveiage weekly earnings," see Perry
V. fFright [1908]
I K. B. 441 4nslow v. Cannock Chase [1909] A. C. 435. Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, Sched. I (i). If the incapacity lasts less than two weeks, no compensation is payable in respect of the first week (ibid, proviso (b)).
;
(b)
[By the Workmen's Compensation (War Addition) Acts, 1917 and 1919, the scale of weekly allowances was raised by 75 per cent. " during the continuance of the present war, and for a period of six months thereafter."]
Title apply to
"work-
Crown
in '"'P'y'"
Crown)
in the
;
same
manner
except
service of the
is
Workmen's Compensation
9.
Note
As stated above, ( 929) except as provided by the statute itself, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, has no application outside But, the United Kingdom (Tomalin v. Pearson [1909] 2 K. B. 61). by the Workmen's Compensation (Anglo-French Convention) Act,
the
1909, provision is made for modification in the application of the principal Act to French citizens, in pursuance of treaty.
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION V
TORTS IN RESPECT OF DOMESTIC AND CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS
TITLE
Definition
SEDUCTION
woman
to
QZQ.
A man who
debauches a
is
whose
entitled,
ill,
is
liable to
The woman
debauching of
de-
nor can a
his
for the
Russell V.
Come
(1704) 2 Ld.
, ,
Raymond,
1031, and 6
Mod.
128, per
v. Thomson (1826) 2 C. & Maunder v. Venn (1829) M. & M. Manley v. Field (l?59) 7 C. B. N.
Holt, C. J.
Manvell
Hutchinson (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 599. (b) Lynch v. Knight (l86l) 9 H. L. C, at p. 589, per Lord Campbell, C. (Before the passing of the Divorce Act, 1S57, s 59, the approipriate action of the husband was for crim. con.)
Terry
v.
and technical action; as will appear seems at one time only to have Iain where Trespass quare clausum fregit could be alleged, and therefore to have been restricted to cases in which the woman was living in the plaintiff's house when the seduction occurred; though it seems afterwards to have been treated rather as trespass to the person {Woodward v. Walton (1807) 2 B. & P. N. R. 476). In either view, the seduction was regarded as mere aggravation of damages
[This
is
a higkly anomalous
It
(Russell v.
Come, ubi
action
was
Digitized
by Microsoft
SEDUCTION
old proprietary relationship of master and servant;
servitium amisit being the gist of the action {Grinnell
7
v.
465
the per quod
Wells (1844) G., at 1041, per Tindal, C. J.)- One of the results of this change of view vfas, that the action could be brought within six
M.
&
(1653)
was decided that either Trespass or. Case could be brought (Chamberlain v. Hazlewood (1839) 5 M. & W. 515); but to the influence of the form of Case can be referred the rule that some evidence of loss of service, however slight, must
Ultimately,
it
v.
fFells,
ubi sup.).]
937. In order
Essential
must prove
(2) that the
^^'"^"'^
pregnancy or
occurred,
'^^
whilst the
in his service.
v. Williams (1847) 10 Q. B. 725. Hedges V. Tagg (1872) L. R. 7 Exch. 238. (b) Hedges v. Tagg, ubi sup., at pp. 285-286, per and Bramwell, BB.
Davtes
lifetime,
if a daughter living with her father is debauched in his and becomes pregnant after his death, her mother cannot bring the action (Hamilton v. Long [1903] 2 I. R. (K. B. D.) 407
[Thus,
[1905] 2
I.
938.
It is
not necessary,
ift
""'
"I'J^,"!
939. Subject to
"
040, -^
"^
where the
woman debauched,
.
employer
Digitized
by Microsoft
466
plaintiff,
when
the offence
^*^
was com-
employment
^^^
not
lie;
plaintiff is the
parent
of, or
It
woman
debauched.
makes no
were rendered
Rist V.
Faux
(1863) 4 B.
&
S. 409,
,
(b) Blaymire v.
(c)
Haley (1840) 6 M. & W. 55. Davies v. Williams (1847) 10 Q. B. 725. Thompson v. Ross (1859) 5 H. &. N. 16. Hedges V. Tagg {l%jz) L. R. 7 Exch. 283.
Whithourne
v.
Colourable
woman
in-
debauched
Speight V. Oliveira (1819) 2 Starkie, N. P. 493 (approved in Griffiths V. Teetgen (1854) 15 C. B., at p. 347).
Presumption
of service
plainPtiff is
woman
was
living in his
offence
the
was
woman debauched
Where
is
be presumed on
is
slight
evidence/"^
the
woman
a minor, but of an
is
a presumption
being rendered.'"*'
Digitized
by Microsoft
SEDUCTION
(a)
467
Bennett v. /Ilkott (1787) 2 T. R. 166. Edmondson v. Machell (1787) 2 T. R. 4 (approved in Irwin v. Dearman (1809) II East, 23) (aunt). Irwin V. Dearman, ubi sup. (adoptive father).
Manvell
(b)
The
Thomson (1826) 2 C. & P. 303 (uncle). woman was away from home on a temporary visit (Griffiths V. Teetgen (1854) 15 C. B. 344) or even on daily work {Rist V. Faux (1863) 4 B. & S. 409) when the offence was commitv.
(c)
ted, is immaterial; if she still continued to live in the plaintiiF's house, and' rendered some service to him. Tullidge V. Wade (1769) 3 Wils. 18.
Bennett
Harper
(d)
Harris
&
&
this
action, a
daughter
intention of
"^'"''"'"s
deemed
to
of her parent.
Long v. Keightley (1877) L. R. 11 C. L. 221, the principle appears to have been extended to the case of a daughter over 21.)
plaintiff
has con-
Conduct of
duced
lie.
"'"''^
Reddie
(1795)
Peake, 240.
[This wfas only a Nisi Prius decision; and it may be doubted whether, on principle, anything less than the plaintiff's actual consent would be sufficient. The conduct of the woman debauched is not material to the right to bring the action; though it may be
material in assessing the damages (see post, 948).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
468
nor
by a comin
by order of discharge
pressly order
(a)
/''^
(b)
& W.
(c).
601.
Affiliation
woman
order
proceedings
no estoppel
an
affiliation
by
a court of
summary
v.
jurisdiction,
is
not an estoppel in
an action under
Andersptt
this Title.
Exemplary damages
plaintiff,
in
an action
under
this Title,
is
woman
may award
feelings or
damages
wounded
anxiety {ante,
Tullidge V.
Irwin Terry
V. v.
Wilson (1791) Peake, 77, took the view that the same rule applied where the plaintiff was an ordinary employer. But this view has been repudiated in a recent case {McKenzie v. Hardinge (1906) XXIII T. L. R. 15).]
his lordship
Aggravation
of
947. Where
the
defendant
has
debauched
the
damages
woman under
Digitized
by Microsoft
SEDUCTION
dence of
this
469
fact
may
be given in aggravation of
damages
titled
is
not en-
to
include in the
Dodd
V.
[The reason
woman
debauched, and
woman
Mitigation
^
^"'"S"
may be
&
P. 308.
&
E. 803.
in
an action under
Position of
'
may
?"'""
fendant's
(a)
(b)
P. 7, per Tindal, C. J. (Probably v. Askey (1837) 8 C. the rule only applies to the plaintiff when he is the parent of, or stands in loco parentis to, the woman debauched.) Hodsoll V. Taylor (1873) L. R. 9 Q. B. 79.
Andrews
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Enticing
II
LOSS
OF CONSORTIUM
tvoman
950.
ingly
and
leave her
latter's
will,
whereby
the
husband
is
his wife,
liable
an action
for
damages by the
husband/''^
(a)
There appears
it is
to be no express authority for this qualification; but submitted that it must be the law.
(b)
Hyde
v.
Winsmore
Scysfor (1619) Cro. Jac. 538. v. Greenhank (1745) Willes, 577; approved by
Mathew,
J.,
of Lords in Allen v. Flood [1898] A. C, at p. 27, and followed by Wright, J., at Nisi Prius in Smith v. Kaye T. L. R. 261. (1904) Lynch v. Knight (1861) 9 H. L. C, at p. 598, per-'LotA Wensleydale.
in advising, the Hoiise
XX
[There is now no action merely for debauching a v^ife; the old action of crim. con. having been abolished by s. 59 of the Divorce Act, 1857. But, under that Act, damages may be awarded against a co-respondent who has been guilty of adultery with the wife, on
a petition by a husband for divorce or judicial separation, or for damages only (s. 33) ; and the principles of the old action are expressly preserved.
(See
/)orf,
I.,
Harbouring
951.
husband has
against
.also
right
of action for
damages
excuse,*"'
any
person
who,
without
lawful
(b)
For lawful excuses, see next section. Winsmore v. Greenhank, uhi sup. But see note to
952.
Digitized
by Microsoft
LOSS OF CONSORTIUM
[Queere
:
471
?
Would an
v.
(See Waterhouse
952.
he
if
No
:
either
(i)
951 will
Excuses
the plaintiff
and
his wife
by agreement, or were
judicially separated,
when
Weedon v. Timhrell (1793) 5 T. R. 357. Lewis V. Ponsford (1838) 8 C. & P. 687 (Nisi Prius). Harvey v. Watson (1844) 7 M. & G. 644.
(ii)
or
R. V. Brooke (1766) 4 Burr. 1991. Philp V. Squire (1791) Peake, 115. Berthon v. Cartwright (1796) 2 'Esp. 480.
(iii)
guilty of
Lord Kenyon, C.
J.
[Inasmuch as a wife is justified in leaving her husband who habitually commits adultery and refuses to amend (Stckert v. Sickert [1899] P. 278), it would seem that the action for harbouring cannot
Queere: as to the effect of a a husband. of adultery in depriving a husband of his rights against single act Regard being had to this decision, and to the case of third parties.
V. Jackson [1891] i Q. B. 671 (which, following Ex parte Sandilands (1852) 21 L. J. Q. B. 342, and overruling Cochrane's Cos/ (1840) 8 Dow. 630, decided that a husband has no right to use force
R.
Digitized
by Microsoft
472
now remains
Physical
'
953. Subject
to
^*^
954,
wife"^"
either intentionally
isting
or
by
some duty
ex-
harm
he
is
liable to
an
in respect of such
The
husband
is
in addition to,
and
independent
any
right
herself, or
may have
her.'**^
to bring
an action
on
Guy V. Livesey (1618) Cro. Jac. 501. Hyde V. Scyssor (1619) Cro. Jac. 538.
Masper v. Brown (1876) I C. P. D. 97 (where, however, the action was held barred by s. 45 of the Offences Against the Person Act,
1861.
Ante, xpo.)
(b)
Dengate v. Brockhank
GWiWr
v. v.
Hemstead
(1838) 4 M. & W. 5. Whitehaven Junction Ry. (1862) 7 H. & N. 834. Phcenix Gas Co. (1865) 3 H. & C. 745.
[Presumably the rule laid down in Alton v. M. R. Co. (1865) 19 C. B. N. S. 213 {post, 959 (b),) applies to a husband suing for loss of consortium.^
(c)
It
is
But on
consortium, e. g. false imprisonment of the wife. (See Norris v. Seed [1849] 3 Exch. 782.) A husband cannot, however, recover damages on the ground that a defamation of the wife has made her ill, and thus deprived her husband of her society {Allsop v. Allsop (i860) 5 H. & N. 534).
(d)
Guy
V.
Hemstead
^~-
Digitized
by Microsoft
LOSS OF CONSORTIUM
954.
473
Fatal
husband whose
wife,
Acd-
'^^"'^ ^'^*
846 {ante,
786)
may
Apart
in
from
statute,
Pym
[Even apart from statute, it would seem that damages might be recovered for loss of a wife's consortium prior to her death {Baker V. Bolton, uhi sup.). And where there is a breach of contractual duty resulting in the death of the plaintiff's wife, evidence of the death
may
2 K. B. 193).
be given in aggravation of damages {Jackson v. Watson [1909] Of course, claims may arise under the Workmen's
(ante, 924-935).]
955. Subject to
to bring"
954, a
an action for
and comfort
Loss of hus""
of her husband.
Lynch
Knight (1861) 9 H. L. C. 577 (where there was much and the case was decided against the plaintiff on the ground of remoteness of idamage). Davies v. Solomon (1871) L. R. 7. Q. B. 112 (where the point was
v.
division of opinion;
also evaded).
[Both these cases were actions of slander; but the loss of consortium was alleged as proof of damage.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Of
servant
III
DEPRIVATION
OF SERVICES
956.
by persuading or compelling
the
such a relation
is
tract or not),'^^ or
by knowingly harbouring,
receiving,
relation,'*^
or detaining a servant
is
for
damages
and an injunction by
(a)
^
the master!
Keb. 59 (quoted also as Fawcet v. Beavrei, 2 Lev. 63). Fores V. Wilson (1791) Peake, 77, per Lord Kenyon, C. J. (b) For the grounds of excuse (if any) see 963 (b). (c) Bird V. Randall (1762) 3 Burr. 1345, per Lord Mansfield. (The decision in this, case was criticized by the Court of King's Bench in Godsall v. Boldero (1807) 9 East, at p. 78; but rather on grounds .of application than of principle. As the action was Case, proof of damage is essential.) Hall V. Hollander (1825) 4 B. & C. 660. (d) Barber v. Dennis (1703) 6 Mod. 69 (only Nisi Prius).
,
'
Keane
(e)
Blake
H. Bl. 511. Lanyon (i79S) 6 T. R. 221. (This case shows that it is not necessary to prove knowledge by the defendant at the time when
v. Boycott (1795) 2
v.
It is sufficient if
he continues to harbour
Francesco
v.
(See also
De
Barnum
sometimes said that, in an action founded on harbouring, from enticing, it is necessary to prove the existence of a valid contract between, the plaintiff and the servant. Probably this statement only means, that the servant cannot be said to have deserted his service if he was lawfully entitled to leave it, and that
[It is
as distinct
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEPRIVATION OF SERVICES
the defendant 9 A.
475
is at liberty to set up this plea (Sykes v. Dixon (1839) E. 693; Pilkington v. Scott (1846) 15 M. W. 657). If this were not so, contracts of employment would, in effect, in most cases, be terminable only at the option of the employer.]
&
&
(0 Hart
Aldridge (1774) I Cowp. 54. Cummings (1847) 5 C. B. 247. Lumley v. Gye (1853) 2 E. B. 224. Evans V. Walton (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 615. (This case shows that, for the purpose of this action, a child Hving with its parent may be a servant of the parent. Possibly a similar principle might be
V.
Hartley
v.
&
v.
Schwenck (1845)
14
M.
& W.
488).)
[The origin of this action has been much debated. A writ of Trespass lay at the common law where the servant had been forcibly abducted; but the action for enticement seems to have been founded upon the Statutes of Labourers (especially the 23 Edw. Ill (1349) c. 2), and to have afterwards been extended by analogy to
cases to which the statutes themselves
had no
application.
The
scope of the action was discussed in the case of Lumley v. Gye, quoted above ; especially in the elaborate judgment of Coleridge, J.
(2 E.
&
on the
and more summary remedies against both. (See the writs in Fitzherbert, Natura Brevium, ff. 167-8.) The rule that notice need not be proved if the servant was found in the same county as that in which the plaintiff lived (which survived
statute lay against the servant as well as the enticer;
also that the statute itself provided to the interpretation put
as late as Fossett v. Breer (1673) 3 Keb. 59), seems to have been due upon the amending statutes of 25 Edw. Ill
(See Hale's note to (1350) c. 7, and 34 Edw. Ill (1360) c. 10. Fitzherbert, 167 C.) The writ of Trespass was not at first available unless actual force was used to the servant (Y. BB. 47 Edw. Ill (1374)
Mich. pi. 15; II Hen. IV (1409) Mich. pi. 46); though this rule appears afterwards to have been relaxed (Y. B. 9 Edw. IV (1496) Mich. pi. 4) for cases of enticing. But for mere harbouring, the only remedy was on the statute (ib.).]
957.
but {semble) in
must prove
Digitized
by Microsoft
476
Barnum
Cox
v.
Muncey
(1859)
v. S.
[In this case of De Francesco v. Barnum, there was no evidence of any de facto service; and the plaintiff was driven to rely upon an alleged breach of a term in the contract of apprenticeship not to serve other persons. It should be noted that circumstances which give rise to an action under 956 or 957, will frequently Jilso support an action for procurement of breach of contract (see Title IV,
post)]
.,
Quasi-contract
may
at his option
waive the
tort,
and sue
of the benefit acquired by the defendant from the apprentice's labour {ante, Bk. II, Pt. II,
Lightly
V.
484
n.).
Clouston (1808)
Taunt. 112.
M.
&
S. 191.
{Tres-
well V. Middleton (1623) ^^o. Jac. 653.) But this case may be explained either on the ground of the form of the action (Debt), or on
when
it
very
difficult to see
any
logical distinction
between the
Physical darhage to
servant
959. Subject to
either intentionally,^"^ or
isting independently of
ex-
inflicted
physical
plaintiff
harm upon
has thereby
and
the
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEPRIVATION OF SERVICES
(a)
477
Robert Marys' Case (1612) 9 Co. Rep., at Norris v. Baker (1616) I Rolle, 393.
fo.
113 a (dictum).
Jones V. Brown (ijgs) Peake, 233. Martinez v. Gerber (1841) 3 M. & G. 88. Alton V. Midland Ry. Co. (1865) 19 C. B. N.
(b)
S., at p.
Dixon
&
&
E. 301.
R. Co., ubi sup. (This decision has been somewhat severely criticized, e. g. in Taylor v. M. S. bf L. Ry. Co. [1895] I Q. B. 134; but chiefly on the ground of the incorrect use made of it. See Kelly v. Metropolitan Ry. Co. [1895] i Q. B., at p. 947; where the point is clearly put by Smith, L. J.). Derringer v. G. E. R. (1879) 4 C. P. D. 163.
Alton V.
M.
Death of
"""'
ser-
harm
some time after the infliction of the inno bar to the recovery of damages in respect of the period between the injury and the death (Baker v.
[If the death takes place
jury, there
would seem
I
to be
Bolton (1808)
Campb.
493).]
to in
959
Death by
'^ "^
the master
may
v.
M.
& W.
Digitized
by Microsoft
478
Markham
v.
Cobh (1626)
Sir
W.
Jones, 147).
Trade dis-
962.
No
action will
lie
in respect of
an act done by
any person
dispute,
3.
Conway
v.
Wade
[1909] A. C. 506.
privilege of Trade Unions has been stated in 755. not restricted to cases of interference between master and serFor the meaning of the phrase "trade dispute," see post vant.
[The wider
It is
973-]
Note
[The action of enticing dealt with in this Title is also sometimes called an action of " seduction " ; but it differs in esseritial points
'
Qucere : are both actions included in s. 56 of the County Courts Act, 1888, R. S. C, O. XXXVI, r. 2, and s. 28 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1914 ?]
in Title
I.
Digitized
by Microsoft
who, knowingly
'"'
^*'
Breach of
Contract
excuse/''^ induces
one party
to
liable to
upon another party to such relation, is an action for damages and an injunction at
improve the industrial position of one's fellow-workmen {Glamorgan Coal Co. v. S. W. Miners [1905] A. C. 239), (a) a desire to enforce, payment of a debt {Giblan v. National Labourers' Union [1903] 2 K. B. 600), or fine (Conway v. Jf^ade [1909] A. C. 506), and (3) an unfounded belief that' the plaintiff's employers are attempting to violate the terms of an inliustrial agreement (Smithies v. National Association of Plasterers [1909] I K. B. 310), are not lawful excuses. It has been judicially suggested, that a duty arising from natural or fiduciary relation might be a justification (Glamorgan Coal Co. V. S. ff. Miners [1903] 2 K. B;, at p. 377, per Stirling, L. J.). (c) Merely supporting or assisting the breaker of a contract after the breach is not an actionable wrong (Denaby v. Torkshire Miners [1906] A. C.
desire to
384)(d)
'
is some doubt whether the action lies for breaches of all cononly of contracts which set up a permanent relation between the parties to them (National Phonograph Co. v. Bell [1908] I Ch., at pp. 366-
There
tracts, or
368).
(e)
Lumley
v.
Gye (1853) 2 E.
&
B. 224. B. 732.
National Phonograph Co. v. Bell [1908] I Ch. 335 (adopting dicta in Allen v. Flood and Quinn v. Leathern, ubi sup.).
Digitized
by Microsoft
480
[It is sometimes said, that in this class of cases there must be "malice" on the part of the defendant. This seems to mean only that the defendant must have acted knowingly and without lawful excuse. {Allen v. Flootl [iSgSi] A. C, at pp. 121 and 154; Quinn v. Leathern, [igoi] A- C, at p. 510; Read v. Operative Stonemasons,
with bust-
964. Subject to
965,
whereby the
action
for
latter
suffers
liable
to
an
person.
Garret v. Taylor (1620) Cro. Jac. 567.
>
>i"
(1793) I Peake, 270. Taylor (1809) II East, 571. Ihbotson V. Peat (1865) 34 L. J. Exch. 118. Pratt V. British Medical Association [1919] i K. B. 244.
Tarleton v.
McGawley
Carrington
v.
[Semble : the act must be " unlawful " ; but it need not be actionable per se (fionway y. JVade [1909] A. C. 506 ; Pratt v. B. M. A., ubi sup).. It is difficult to know exactly what " unlawful, 'means in this connection.]
Trade
pute
dis-
Ill
965.
No
action will
lie
in respect of
an act done by
any person
dispute,
an
employment of
the right of
some other
per-
wills.
Trade Disputes Act, 1906, s. 3. (It would seem that this section would not exemfit in the case of actual breaches of contract, not being a contract of employment.)
[Threats to interfere with a workman unless he transfers from one trade union to another may be protected by this section in an action by the workman. It has been held that such a' proceeding is not a " trade dispute " within the meaning' of the Act {Valentine But see Hodges v. Webb [1920] 2 Ch. <v. Hyde [191.9] 2 Ch. 129). The question is really one of fact in each case (JVhite v. Riley 70.
[1921]
I
Ch.
(C. A.)).
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
VI
CONSPIRACY
966. If two or more persons enter into a criminal
conspiracy, with the design of causing
Criminal
"p-jj"'
harm
to
another
person, and
to
harm
is
directly caused
will
by such conspiracy
have an action for
all
or any of the
Mogul SS. Co. V. Macgregor*(lSS^) 23 Q. B. D., at p. 624. Quinn V. Leathern [1901] A. C, at pp. 529 and 542, per Lords Brampton and Lindley. Giblan v. National &c. Union [1903] 2 K. B. 600.
[A criminal conspiracy has been defined as an "agreement by two or more to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means" {Mulcahy v. Reg. (1868) L. R. 3 H. L. 317, /><?r Willes, J., adopted in R. v. Brailsford [1905] 2 K. B. 730). This definition, which is founded on an earlier dictum of Lord Denman in R. v. Jones (1832) 4 B. & Ad. 345, has been criticized; and, indeed, it is difficult to see what the second part of it adds to the first. It will be observed, that an unlawful object need not be in itself criminal it is sufficient it if amounts to a civil wrong (Jieg. v. Warburton (1870) L. R. I C. C. 276), such as the procurement of a breach of contract {Kearney v. Lloyd (1890) 26 L. R. Ir. 268), or, possibly, an ecclesiastical dffence {Boots v. Grundy (1900) 82 L. T. 769).]
[We can
c.
tort of Conspiracy, (i) A statute of 28 Edw. I (1300) provided for the issue of a Writ of Conspiracy; and an ordinance of 33 Edw. I (1305) defined the persons against whom this This writ only lay where "two, three or more writ could issue. persons of malice or covin do conspire and devise to indict any person falsely, and afterwards he who is so indicted is acquitted." (F. N. B. 114 D.) Afterwards, it appears, the writ was confined to
making of the
10,
R2
Digitized
by Microsoft
482
whereby the plaintiff's had been endangered (Skinner v. Gunton (1669) I Wms. Saund. The remedy so devised, and the action on the case derived 228). out of it (Y. BB. 3 Ass. (4329) pi. 13 7 Hen. IV (1405) Mich. pi. 15, fo. 31 II Hen. VH (1519) Trin. pi. 7, fo. 26) are the parents of the
cases of indictment for treason or felony,
life
; ;
but, as will appear, the existence action of Malicious Prosecution of this Writ of Conspiracy, and the Action on the Case, may have influenced the scope and. nature of the modern action of Conspiracy. (2) The Court of Star Chamber treated conspiracies to commit crimes or torts as substantive offences {The' Poulterers' Case (161 1) 9^ Rep. 55 b.); and this idea was taken over by the Court of King'5 Bench after the Restoratiqn {R- v. Starling et al. (1664) I Keb. 675). Thus we get the modern crime of conspiracy. Ultimately, in the early part.of.thefniiieteenth century, it seems to have been admitted, that an action lay for intentional damage caused by a criminal conspiracy {Gregory v. D. of Brunswick (1844) 6 M. Gr. 205, 953). Possibly this development was aided by the existence of the action on the case for conspiracy (Malicious Prosecution). The criminal offence presents an analogy to the old Writ of Conspiracy, in that neither the writ lay against, nor could the criminal offence be committed by, one person only (F. N. B. 114 D). The gist of the Action on the Case, on the other hand, is the damage caused to the plaintiff; and it can be brought against one defendant only. (3) In the eighteenth century, the idea had also been entertained by some of the. judges, that a conspiracy to impede the free course of trade was a criminal offence at common law {R. v. 'Journeymen Tailors (1721) 8 Mod. 11). It is true that this idea has been by no means universally accepted (Wright, Conspiracies, 1-18; Stephen, H. C. L. Ill, 210); and it is clear that this common law offence, if it existed,, was unimportant whilst the Combination l,aws were in force. On their repeal, however, the question whether such an offence existed became a very practical question and in many cases the judges acted on the hypoth'esis that it did exist (see Reg. v. Druitt (1867) 10 Cox, 592; Reg. V. Bunn (1872) 12 Cox, 316). In some cases, moreover, they seem to have regarded it as part of some more general ,pririciple that a conspiracy to injure, aimed at a specific person, was a crime which would give rise to an action at the suit of the injured party; even though, the acts of the individual conspirators were neither criminal nor tortious (see cases cited by Lord Macnaghten in Quinn v. Leathern [igoi] A. C. at pp. 510, 511). Prac-: tically, however, the principle was only applied to cases of trade disputes. Between the years 1875 and 1906, this action for conspiracy assumed an importance which it had not previously enjoyed.
;
&
Digitized
by Microsoft
CONSPIRACY
The Conspiracy and
483
Protection of Property Act of 1875 had provided, that a combination to do an act in contemplation or further-
ance of a trade dispute should not be indictable as a conspiracy; if the act committed by one person would not be a crime. But the Courts held that this did not prevent persons injured by such conspiracies from' bringing the civil action of conspiracy for damages (Quinn v. Leathern [1901] A. C, at p. 542). The Trade Disputes Act, 1906, has in substance enacted for the civil wrong what the statute of 1875 enacted for the criminal offence. The result is, that, practically, the only class of cases in which the action of Conspiracy came into question has ceased to be affected by it. All that is left is the vague principle, that a conspiracy to injure a specific person may be a criminal offence, and give rise to a civil action; even though the acts of the individual conspirators are neither criminal nor tortious a principle of which it is difficult to find any concrete illustration outside the sphere of trade disputes.]
967. Subject
to 970, 971,
and 972,
if
two or more
injury
to
harm
to
he
wills,
and harm
is
all
or
Quinn
v.
M.
&
G. 205, 953.
[The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Davies v. Thomas qualified the above state[1920] 2 Ch. 189, seems to have materially ment, by holding that such a combination is not unlawful, unless it
seeks to achieve its object by illegal means at any rate lyhere the combination has been formed to protect common trade interests,
and the object is incident to that purpose. See also fFare Motor Trades Association (1921) XXXVII T. L. R. 213.]
v.
The
Digitized
by Microsoft
484
Other injuries
968.
an action
will
also
lie
where the
effected
right to
of the words).
Allen
V.
Sweeney
Lord Davey.
[But see the American case of Hutchins Bigejow; Leading Cases on Torts, p. 207.]
v.
Hutchins (1845)
Judgment
against one
969. Even
if all
defendant
judgment may be
combination was
if
in
fact
V. Kinnersley (1719) I Str. igj. Walters v. Green [1899] 2 Ch., at p. 701. Giblan v. National Labourers [1903] 2 K. B. 600.
[The cases quoted in Walters v. Green in support of this proposion examination to be cases of Malicious Prosecution. But the decision in R. v. Kinnersley seems to show that the view expiressed in the text is correct.]
tion will be found
Trade competition
970.
It
is
complained
25,
Digitized
by Microsoft
CONSPIRACY
in
485
Trade com'"""
971.
An
act
done
pursuance of an agreement or
is
not, if
done in
if
i.
[This section, which is to be read as an addition to s. 3 of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, dealing with criminal liability for conspiracy, seems to affirm by implication the doctrine, occasionally doubted (see p. 483), that an act may be wrongful if done in combination, which is lawful, or at least not actionable, if done by an individual.]
972.
An
act done
by
a/
person in contemplation or
is
Trade
dis-
not actionable on
ferference
is
3.
755.]
in 062, 071,
Definition of
and 972, means any dispute between- employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which
is
"trac
pute'
a " trade
Digitized
by Microsoft
486
Definition of
973 means
wor men
^jj pgj-gQj^g
whom
5 (3).
Note on Section
It is
I, 17) is to be treated as one person or several. Probably, the corporation could be made liable for the conspiracy of its agent {Pratt v. B. M. A. [1919] I K. B. 244).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
VII
TITLE
MALICIOUS
action
^*^
PROSECUTION AND
the
where
defendant
has, Malicious
/'^"'^"
on
to
involving
scandal
the
reputation
or
damage
the plaintiff
(a)
N. E. Ry. (1886) L. R. 11 App. Ca., at p. 251, per Lord Bramwell. (b) Abrath v. N. E. Ry. (1886) ubi sup. Cox V. English (sfc. Bank [1905] A. C, at p. 175, per Lord Davey. (c) Rayson v. South London Tramways Co. [1893] 2 Q. B. 304 (criminal). Whitworth v. Hall (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 695 Johnson v. Emerson (1871) L. R. 6 Exch. 329
/Ibrath v.
fFyatt V.
Palmer [1899] 2 Q.
B., at p.
no
(bankruptcy).
Cox V. English Joint Stock Bank [1905] A. C. 168J Quartz Hill Gold Mining Co. v. Eyre (1883) 11 Q.
ing up).
(d)
D. 674 (wind-
Salk. 13.
v.
ef seq.
[As has been previously pointed out (p. 482), the action of Malseems to have been an early offshoot of the action of Conspiracy, invented to meet the difficulties raised by the latter highly technical action. An example of the process may be found as early as 1496 (Y. B. 11 Hen. VII. Tr. pi. 7); and it is fully recognized by Fitzherbert {Nat. Brev. 1 16, A. K. L.). The well-marked
icious Prosecution
R3
Digitized
by Microsoft
488
distinctions
between the Writ of Conspiracy and the action of Malwere (i) that the latter could be directed against a single defendant, while the former required two defendants at least, (ii) that the latter lay for false indictments on "common trespasses," (i. ., misdemeanours), whilst the former could only issue in case of false indictments of treason or felony. The action of Maliicious Prosecution
Prosecution became common in the seventeenth century; and, in one report (Carth. 416) of the leading case of Savile v. Roberts in 1698, is expressly called "an action on the Case in nature of a Conspiracy." The same report (p. 417) shows that the modern
cious
title
On
action of False Imprisonment {ante, 902910) are (i) that Malicious Prosecution involves the setting in motion of a judicial officer, whilst false imprisonment is the act of a private person or a ministerial officer {Austin v. Dowling (1870) L. R. 5 C. P., at p. 54p), and (ii) that. False Imprisonment being Trespass, no proof of damage is necessary in that action, while Malicious Prosecution is an action of Case, in which damage is (at
least noniinally) of the gist of the action. Bowen, L. J., has ingeniously suggested {Quartz Hill Gold Mining Co. v. Eyre, ubi sup.,
somewhat analogous
is
Definition of criminal
proceedings
indictments
and
criminal
informations
in-
of liberty 5
Quartz Hill Gold Mining Co.
[It
v.
Eyre (1883)
11
Q. B. D.,
at p. 691.
seems doubtful whether the action would lie for preferring of indictment which was thrown out by the grand jury. On the one hand, Payne v. Porter (1618) Cro. Jac. 490, and Jones v. Gwynn (1713) 10 Mod. 214, are in the affirmative; while on the
a
bill
other,
Byne
v.
187,
is
in the negative.
But
bill
may
to contain scandal.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
(ii)
489
mary
(iii)
Windham Morgan
Elsee
(1589) Cro. Eliz. 130 (severely criticized in 2 T. R., at p. 231, per Ashurst J.; but only in regard to the form of action).
Clere
v.
Hughes (1788)
V. Smith (1822) I D. & R. 97. Hensworth v. Fowkes (1833) i B. & Ad. 449.
(iv)
[There appears to be no authority for or against this last proposibut, regard being had to the extensive criminal jurisdiction of courts martial, it would seem that the action ought to lie. The cases of Sutton v. "Johnstone (1786) i T. R. 544, Dawkins v. Lord Rokeby (1866) 4 F. & F. 806, and Dawkins v. Lord Paulet (1869) L. R. 5 Q. B. 94, were cases of breach of military discipline, where the same considerations do not apply. But, even in such cases, the remarks of Cockburn, C. J., in the last case, and Lord Penzance in Dawkins v. Lord Rokeby (1875) L. R. 7 H. L., at p. 755, are worthy of consideration. There seems to be authority for saying, that an ex officio proceeding in an ecclesiastical court will give rise to an action of Malicious Prosecution {Hocking v. Matthews (1671)
tion;
,
Ventr. 86).
Quare:
as to divorce
and
affiliation proceedings.]
must prove
that
Essentials of
the
^*^
proceedings
complained of termi-
nated
were
capable of so terminating;
Digitized
by Microsoft
490
(a)
Morgan
(b)
&
(c)
Whiiworth V. Hall (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 695. Basebe v. Matthews (1867) L. R. 2 C. P. 684. Ahrath V. iV. . iSjy. Co. (1883) II Q. B. D., at p. 455, per Bowen, L. J. Bynoe v. Bank of England [igoz] l K. B. 467. Steward v. Gromett (1859) 7 C. B. N. S. 191. (In this case, the defendant had, on ex parte proceedings, exhibited articles of the peace against the plaintiff, who had had no opportunity of rebutting the charges. For the modern practice in such cases,
see
Summary
s.
25.)
[The fact that the plaintiff was acquitted on a flaw in the indictment, does not alter the fact that the proceedings terminated in his favour {Wicks v. Fentham (1791) 4 T. R. 247; Pippett v. Hearn
(1822) 5 B.
&
Aid. 634).]
(ii)
cause
Hicks
Faulkner (1878) 8 Q. B. D. 167. N. E. Ry. (1883) II Q. B. D. 440, aff'd (1886) L. R. App. Ca. 247.
V. V.
Abrath
11
(iii)
Kennedy (1748)
Wils. 232.
Macnamara
Henderson-
Brown
V.
v.M. Hawkes
K. B.,'at
if
p. 728.
and,
the plaintiff
fails
Thus,
is
if
reason-
not sufficient
(Williams
v.
p.
M.
& W.,
at p. 587, per
Lord Abinger,
Digitized
by
IVlicrosoft
MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
C. B.).
actual
It is
491
sometimes said, that the plaintiff must also prove But proceedings this being an action on the Case. which will give rise to the action of Malicious Prosecution import damage without special proof. (Quartz Hill Gold Mining Co. v. Eyre (1883) 11 Q. B. D., at p. 691, et seq.)]
damage;
978. Subject
or
to
979,
Reasonable "
institution
proceedings com-
plained
belief
is
of.'*'
The
when
^''^
by the
defendant.
(a)
Broad v. Ham (1839) 5 Bing. N. C. 722. M. & W. 131. Hinton V. Heather (1845) Turner v. Ambler (1847) 10 Q. B. 252. Haddrick V. Heslop (1847) 12 Q. B. 285. Lister V. Ferryman (1870) L. R. 4 H. L. 521. (This was an action 'of false imprisonment; but the reasoning applies.) Hicks V. Faulkner (1878) 8 Q. B. D. 167; (1882) 46 L. T. 427. (b) Delegal v. Highley (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 950. Fitzjohn V. Mackindef(li6l) 9 C. B. N. S., at p. 531, per Cockburn,
C.J.
[An unfounded and unreasonable belief in the plaintifE's guilt, is, however honest, not a " reasonable and probable cause " for the
purposes of
977
(ii).
Ir.
R.
i82.)J
979. Where
against the
search
warrant
has
been issued
of the
Search
'^'""'''" ^
.plaintiff
on the bond
fide application
is
Digitized
by Microsoft
492
Hope
Lea
Fielding (1846) 16
M.
& W.
200.]
Acquittal of
plaintiff
was acquitted
/""""#
4 Taunt.
7.
Willans
V.
J.
[Is there any reason for supposing that a similar rule would not apply in the case of bankruptcy or liquidation proceedings ?]
Legal advice
981.,
Where
upon
Ravenga
v.
Blackford
V.
Mackintosh (1824) 2 B. & C. 693. (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 179. N. E. Ry. (1883) 11 Q. B. D., at pp. 454-455; (1886)
DW
at p. 249.
was afterwards
Court and
'"'^^
a question for
'^'
on the
facts as
Whether
Digitized
by Microsoft
MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
there
493
was malice
in the
defendant,
is
a question of fact
Johnstone
Turner
v.
Lister V.
v. Sutton (1786) I T. R., at p. 545. Ambler (1847) 'o Q- B-, at p. 260, per Lord Denman, C. J. Ferryman (1870) L. R. 4 H. L., at p. 535, per Lord Chelms-
ford, C.
(b)
V. Tayor (1829) 6 Bing., at pp. 186-187, P'^ Tindal, C. J. Blackford V. Z)o(/ (1831) 2 B. Ad. 179. Mitchell V. Jenkins (1833) 5 B. Ad. 588. H'f*j V. Faulkner (1878) 8 Q. B. D., at p. 174.
milans
&
&
is
Malice
may infer
malice/*'
Such
Mitchell
Musgrave
&
M.
at
p.
587, per
Lord
Haddhck
(b)
V.
Willans
v.
Brown
V.
Hawkes
Q. B. 718.
[The fact that the defendant was bound over to prosecute may be material on the question of malice {Dubois v. Keats (1840) 11 A.
&
E. 329; Fitzjohn
v.
Mackinder (1861) 9 C. Bi N.
S. 505).]
may be awarded
in actions Exemplary
and a new
trial will
not be
''""'^"
of the jury.
Leith V.
Pope (1780) 2 W.
V.
Bl. 1327.
Hewlett
Digitized
by Microsoft
494
Action
lies
985.
may
be
against a corporation
Carlton
22.
Bramwell
in
^ira^A
pp. 250-254.
it
Malicious
arrest
986. Where
the
defendant
has,
maliciously
and
plaintiff,'^^
lie
by the
plaintiff
damages.
nated in the
'
''
B. .929. Churchill v. Siggers (1854) 3 E. Gilding v. Eyre (1861) 10 C. B. N. S. 592. (b) Waterer v. Freeman (1620) Hob. 266. Craig V. Hasell (1843) 8 Q. B. 481.
(a)
&
Chandler v. Poulton (1865) 3 H. & C. 553. The' Walter D. Wallet [1893] P. 202.
[The action also lies where the execution is for an amount exceeding that due under^ the judgment (Churchill v. Siggers, ubi sup., ft PP- 937^3^, P^^ Lord Campbell, C. J.) ; and proof' of bonajide/ is no defence (ClisseU v. Cratchky [1910] 2 K. ,B, 244).]
(c)'
Watkins
De Medina
Lee (1839) 5 M. & W. 270. v. Grove (1846) 10 Q. B., at p. 168, per Lord Denman, C. J. (But where irregular arrest is proved, the Court will assume that the proceedings terminated in the plaintiff's favour {Gilding
v. V.
Digitized
by Microsoft
MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
987. (Possibly) an action
civil
'
495
proceedings brought maliciously and without rea" sonable and probable cause, whereby the plaintiff has
suffered loss;
i)ut in
"""'iP^" ceeatngs
loss necessary to
support the action must be more than the mere expenses of defending the proceedings.
Roret V. Lewis (1848) 17 L. J. Ex. 99. Cotterell v. Jones (1851) 11 C. B. 713. Quartz Hill Gold Mining Co. v. Eyre (1883) II Q. B. D. 674.
[Horsley v. Style (1893) 69 L. T. 222 (wrongful registration of of sale) seems to have been treated by the Court as falling under this head. Sed qucere.]
bill
jjJijrti;.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
II
MAINTENANCE
CHAMPERTY
the'
AND
Maintenance
988.
and
or
assists
another in
'^^
of
civil
by
third person,
suffers losSjfe) is
hable to
(1843) 4 Q. B. 883. P. C. C. (1909) XXV T. L. R. 789. (b) Mere advice is not maintenance (Y. B. 22 Hen. VI (1443), Mich.
Scott V.
Flight V.
Leman
S.
N.
pi. 54, per Curiam; Hawkins, P. C. Book I, c. 89, 9); neither is, now-a-days, the assignment of a chose-in-action, even though the* sole object be to enable the assignee to take harassing proceed-
Cave [1905] 2 K. B. 364). assignment of a mere right to litigate savours of Maintenance; though possibly it may not amount to a tort. {Prosser v. Edmonds (1835) i Yo. & C. (Ex.) 481 (assignment of right to file a bill in equity for a fraud); May v. Lane (1894) 64 L. J. Q. B. 236, />r Rigby, L. J.).
ings against the plaintiff (Fitzroy v.
Pechell v. Watson (1841) 8 M. W. 601. Alabaster v. Harness [1895] I Q. B. 339. Greig v. National Union (1906) XXII T. L. R. 274. (d) Bradlaugh v. Newdegate (1883) II Q. B. D. I.
(c) (e)
&
Findon
v. Parker Abinger, C. B.
(1843)
11
M.
&
W.,
at
p.
682,
per Lord
(f)
V. Thompson [1907] 2 K. B. 489 (though the action failed on another ground). Including an election petition {Wallis v. D. of Portland (1797) 3 Ves. Maintenance has no application to criminal proceedings. 494).
Holden
(g) (h)
proper remedy in such a case is Malicious Prosecution {Grant Thompson (1895) 73 L. T. 264). Neville v. London Express [1919] A. C. 368.
v.
The
Bradlaugh
v.
p.
1 1.
Digitized
by Microsoft
497
[As has previously been pointed out (Book I, 92), contracts inits aggravation. Champerty, are void on may here also be stated, that both Maintenance and Champerty are also criminal offences (see i Edw. Ill
(1326)
St. II, c.
14;
c.
Ric. II (1377) c. 4; 7 Ric. II (1383) c. 15; 9); for it is, apparently, out of the criminal
grown {Metropolitan Bank v. Pooley L.R. loApp. Ca.,atp. 2i8,/>i?rLordSelborne, C). Formerly
many transactions which are now regarded as innocent {c. g. the assignment of a chose-in-action) were held to amount to Maintenance {Master v. Miller (1791) 4 T. R. 340, per Buller, J.); but, with the gradual increase of social tranquillity. Maintenance, at any rate in the simpler form, almost disappeared from practice. It revived, however, with somewhat dramatic effect in Bradlaugh v. Newdegate {ubi sup.) and, as will appear from the text, there have been a good many recent cases on the point. Champerty is an aggravated and subtle form of Maintenance. Like Maintenance, it is expressly prohibited by statute (28 Edw. I (1300) c. 11; so-called "Statute of Champerty" (uncertain date, usually given as 33 Edw. i (1305)).]
;
989. The
ful in the
Success of
^ec"ss'ary'
proceedings maintained,
no bar
of Maintenance.
Neville v.
London Express [1919] A. C. 368. (The House was divided has been suggested that the success of the defendant may be proof that the-plaintiff has suffered no damage {Hickman v. Kent and
it
XXXVI
T. L. R., at p. 532.)
in
an action of Maintenance
(i)
Justification
had
common and
maintained, whether
contingent,'*^ or
Digitized
by Microsoft
498
related to
by a and
and
servant/"^ or
that he
assistance
(a)
by motives of
charity/"*^
Findon v. Parker (1843) 1 1 M. & W. 675. BradlaUgh v. Newdegate (1883) U Q. B. D., at p. II. Alabaster v. Harness [1894] 2 Q. B., at p. 905. British Cash Co. v. Lamson [19,08] I K. B. 1006. (b) So in the old books. But see Burke v. Greene (1814) 2 Ball. 517; Hutley V. Hutley (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 112. (c) Bradlaugh v. Newdegate, ubi sup., at p. II. (d) Harris v. Brisio (1886) 17 Q. B. D. 504. Holden V. Thompson [1907] 2 K. B. 489 (religious sympathy).
&
B.
[The
last case
sole motive.]
Genuineness
991. The
justification
rela-
tion^
tionship of master
may
be
(Queere:
Scott V.
N.
S. P. C. C. (1909)
XXV
8
(b)
Fischer v.
Action
against com-
992.
^
An
lie
against
pany
in
company j r
how
liquidation
Metropolitan
Bank
v.
Qutei-e:
Cash
Co. V.
Lamson
[1908]
K.
Champerty
993. Where a
suit is
Digitized
by Microsoft
499
"Champerty";
is
the suit
jured.
by the party
in-
mere agreement
amount
to
Champerty.
James
368 b. Kerr (1889) 40 Ch. D., at p. 456. Rees V. de Bernardy [1896] 2 Ch. 437. Wedgerfield v. de Bernardy (1908) XXV T. L. R. 21.
994. Neither
common
XXIX
interest
<''
nor charity
<'')
is
No
justifica-
Thamperty
(b)
T. L. R. 295. Cole V. Booker (1913) Hutley v. Hutley (1873) L. R. 8 Q. B. 112. (But see Seear v. Lauison (1880) IS Ch. D. 426 ; and Guy v. Churchill (1888) 40 Ch. D.
481).
[Can Champerty be
justified
?]
in a successful action of
Main-
Measure of
'""''^"
which the
plaintiff
proceedings maintained, solicitor and client costs incurred by him in carrying on or defending such latter
proceedings.
Scott V.
N.
S. P. C. a.
(1909)
XXV
T. L. R. 789.
[Of course a successful plaintiff in an action of Maintenance as a rule also gets his party and party costs of that action.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION
VIII
(DEFAMATION)
Definition
996.
pcrsoii
excuse, either
writing,
print,
^''^
or by
or
similar
means
(" libel"),
to
(subject to 1006-9) * ^^
action for
whom
such statement
published, and,
if
necessary, for an
such statement/'^
(a)
Watkin
v.
[There are one or two modern developments which may give gramophone, phonograph, cinematograph, &c.]
rise to interesting questions, e. g.
'
Case of Libels (1606) 5 Rep. 125. II Mod. 99 ("^s to paint a man playing at cudgels with his wife") per Holt, C. J. du Bost V. Beresford (1810) 2 Campb. 511 (picture). Monson V. Tussauds Ld. [1894] i Q. B. 671 (wax model). Corelli V. Wall (1906) XXII T. L. R. 532 (picture postcard) fer Swinfen Eady, J.
(b)
Anon. (1706)
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
is
501
[This last case appears to show that a mere invasion of privacy And see Roberson v. Rochester Folding Box Co. (1902) 171 N. Y. 538, quoted in Kenny, Cases on Tort,
not, as such, defamatory.
PP- 364-367]
(c)
Cropp V. Tilney (1693) 3 Salk. 225. Abp. of Tuam v. Robeson (1828) 5 Bing.
Clements
v.
17.
Chivis (1829) 9 ^C. 172. Cook V. Ward (1830) 6 Bing. 409. Nevill V. Fine Art Co. [1897] A. C, at p. 72, per Ld. Halsbury, C.
&
[The question is, not whether the defendant intended to disparage the plaintiff, but whether persons to whom the statement was published would so understand it {Hankinson v. Bilby (1847) 16 M. & W. 442; Marks V. Samuel [1904] 2 K. B. 287). For examples of imputations held to be defamatory, see Addendum I
'
(P- 524)-]
(d)
771, per
Bank
v.
Henty (1882) L. R.
App. Ca.,
at p.
[Disparagement of the
plaintiff's
goods
is
Harlow
(1844) 5 Q. B. 624).]
Saxby
v.
Thorley's
Easterbrook (1878) 3 C. P. D. 339. Food for Cattle Co. v. Massam (1880) 14 Ch. D. 763.
[The injunction may even be granted before trial {Collard v. Marshall [1892] I Ch. 571); but only when it is clear that if a jury gave a verdict for the defendants, it would be set aside as unreasonable {Bonnard v. Ferryman [1891] 2 Ch. 269).]
[In spite of the dictum of Fletcher Moulton, L. J., in Jones v. B., at p. 458, it cannot be admitted that "the action of libel" (or, indeed, any form of defamation except the
Hulton [1909] 2 K.
common
law."
On
Chamber
was fully admitted, by the three judges, in an important came before the King's Bench at the end of the fifteenth century (Y. B. 12 Hen. VII (1498) Tr. pi. 2, fo. 22 a) that slanderous words were then matter for the ecclesiastical courts; though it is clear, from other evidence, that actions for slander had long been familiar in the local courts of the manor and borough (S. S. Select
Digitized
by Microsoft
502
ih. The Court Baron Pleas in Manorial Courts, pp. 36, 82, 95, &c. &c. pp. 133, 136).- More than a hundred years later, in the Court of Star Chamber, Hbel, so far as the King's Courts were concerned,' was treated as a purely criminal matter; whether it was directed against a private person or against a magistrate {Case of Scandalous Libels (1605) 5 Rep. 125 a). The procedure is in that case said to be (a) indictment at the common law, or (b) bill or confession in
the Star
is
offence
Case for and there are several reported decisions of the sixteenth century, the
first
it
being, apparently, in the year 1536 {Anon. Dyer, 19 a), when was held by tlie Court of Common Bench, that two plaintiffs who had been called by the defendant "two false knaves and thieves"
Russell's Case (1537) Dyer, 26 b, the principle that words imputing crime are actionable per se, was clearly adopted by the same Court
on a plea of non damnificatus ; and thereafter the action of Case for spoken w;ords becomes common in the reports of Dyer, Godbolt, and Jenkins, though the other sixteenth-century reporters apparently ignore it. In the year 1586, we get the interesting decision, that the allegation of malice in a declaration of slander is only
On
its omission is not fatal {Mercer's Case, Jenk. 268). the other hand, though the introduction of the printing press
would seem to have rendered such a reniedy essential, the action of Case for libel does not make its way into the books until the seventeenth century,
bill in
it
the Star
when it begins to be regarded as an alternative of a Chamber {Lake v. Hatton (1618) Hob. 252); and
is then admitted by the reporter (Hobart) that to the action of Case, as distinguished from a bill or indictment, a plea of truth is
'
Another difference early taken was that, while communication to the party libelled may be sufficient publication for, a criminal prosecution, it is insufficient for an action of Case {Edwardes v. Wootton (1607), reported in Hawarde's Cases in the Star Chamber, ed. Baildon, pp. 343-4; Barrow v. Levjellin (16 16) Hob. 62; Hicks' Case {i6iC))\\).zi^). The practice of awarding damages
to the libelled party, in addition to the fine or imprisonment due to the criminal character of the offence, was introduced by the Star
a good answer.
Chamber
itself,
as in
Edwardes
Stat,
v. Wootton, ubi sup., and in Lake's Pap. (Dom.) Ill, pp. 19, 21, and Hud-
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
503
son, Star Chamber, p. 227); and it would, therefore, have been natural that, on the abolition of the Star Chamber in 1641, the civil
action for
damages should
cedure.
cases from the Restoration onwards (one of the earliest being the
well-known Lake
libel
King on p^liamentaty
in
1668),
continued for some time to be regarded mainly as a criminal offence punishable on indictment or information and it may be to this fact that we owe the rule (certainly anomalous in an action of Case) that in libel no damage need be proved. The greater popularity of the action of slander is shown by the publication of a special
;
treatise
on the subject
in
by the
The
jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts in abolished until 1855 (18 19 Vic. c. 41); but as, long before that time (Palmer's and Thorpe's Case (1583) 4 Rep. 2o), the King's Courts had adopted the rule of prohibiting suits in the ecclesiastical courts where the plaintiff had a remedy at law, and as the ecclesiasti-
&
would only
words
{Harris v. Butler (1798) I Hagg. 463 n), the scope of the jurisdiction must have been small. It seems to have been chiefly resorted to in the case of spoken words imputing unchastity, which, until the passing of the Slander of Women Act,
imputing an
ecclesiastical offence
89 1, were not actionable per se in the common law courts, and are so actionable only when spoken of a woman. It seems, therefore, that, while the common law action of slander may be as old as 1535, the common law action of libel only dates from the commencement of the seventeenth century.]
1
now
in fact
(^)
is
not necessary to
Special
words spoken
rendering
an offence
him
when
(ii)
misconduct or
where the
plaintiff
is
a trader,
insolvency at such
time,^"*)
Digitized
by Microsoft
504
the plain-
is
a female, unchastity.^^)
is
Defamatipn, damage
(a)
Blackstone {Comm. v. Lord Kerry (i" 2) 4 Taunt. 355. seems to have thought that special damage must be proved' to make signs or pictures actionable. Sed quiere. (b) Higges V. Austen (i6og) Yelv. 152. Marshall v. Steward {161^) Hob. 129. Penson v. Gooday (1633) Cro. Car. 327. Webb v. Beavan (1883) II Q. B. D. 609. Hellivig V. Mitchell [191G] i K, B. 609 (mere liability to arrest is
Thorley
Ill, 126)
insufficient).
(c)
Bellamy Foulger
v. v.
Burch (1847) 16 M.
& W.
590.
(1867) L. R. 2 Ex. 327. 0'atkin V. Hall (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B., at p. 399, per Blackburn, Booth y. Arnold [1895] I Q. B. 571.
Newcpmb
J.
illegal
(Foulger
v.
Newcomb,
uhi
(d)
Brown
&
C. 180.
actionable
V.
[There appears to be some doubt whether such an imputation, is />r se if made of a person who is not a trader {Dauncey Holloway\x()oi\ 2 K. B. 441).]
(e)
&
[The cases on
(f)
this point are all of venereal diseases.] Act, 1891 (In an action founded on this statute,
Slander of
Women
the plaintiff cannot recover more costs than damages; unless the judge certifies that there was reasonable gi;ound for the action.)
(g)
Daiincey
v.
Holloway
[1901] 2
K. B. 441.
[A mere allegation of unfitness to hold an honorary office is not actionable per se (Alexander v. Jenkins [1892] i Q. B. 797); neither is a mere statement to the effect that the plaintiff labburs under
suspicion of having committed a crime (Tozer v. Mashford (1851) 6 Exch. 539; Simmons v. Mitchell (1880) L. R. 6 App. Ca. 156). In Vicars v. Wilcocks (i8o6) 8 East, i, it was held, that where the
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
special
505
damage alleged was the wrongful act of a third party, the damage was too remote. But this decision is inconsistent with other
Davis v. Gardiner (1593) 4 Rep. 16; Green v. Button R, 707 (not defamation); Lynch v. Knight (1861) (1835) 2 C. M. 9 H. L. C, at p. 600). It would seem that the proper test is the general rule {ante, 724, 797) that the damage must be the 'natural and probable consequence of the defamation {Chamberlain v. Boyd
cases
(e. g.
&
'
v.
Hughes
[1904]
K. B.
138).]
civil action,
defamatory
Publication
deemed
if it
to
fendant,
to
the knowledge
was made
to
(')
intentionally or
by
mistake.^^^
is,^^^
Comis
plaintiff
but comnot,
munication
publication.
(a)
the
wife
of the
defendant,
(b)
Parkes v. Prescott (1869) L. R. 4 Ex. 169. Fleetwood v. Curley (1619) Hob., at p. 268, per Hobart, C.
J.
Amann
(c)
v.
Damm
v.
(i860) 8 C. B. N.
[1901] 2
S., at p.
Sadgrove
Hole
K. B.
I
i.
Pullman
Bo.sius
v. V.
(Qn
this
point
.
Edmondson
(d)
Shepheard
Williams
v.
(e)
Wenman
Wennhak
v. v.
(0
[Whether the defendant can be made liable for a communication X, when in fact he intended a communication to Y, depends on whether his acts were sucTi as would be likely, in the judgment of a reasonable man, to lead to communication to X {Sharp v. Skues (1909) XXV T. L. R. 336). It appears that the fact that the publication was procured by the plaintiff himself (e. ,g. by sending a servant to purchase a copy of a libel) is no objection to the action (D. of Brunswick v. Harmer (1849) 14 Q. B. 185).]
to
Digitized
by Microsoft
5o6 Who
'"
'
is
and pubhsher
(in the
commercial sense)
(*)
of a news-
deemed
to
tained therein.
distributes
is
he can show
Adams
Parkes
v. Kelly (1824)
v. Prescott
Ry.
&
Moo.
Duke of Brunswick v. Harmer (1849) '4 Q- ^' 1^5Shepheard v. Whitaker (187,5). L. R- 1 C, P. 502. (c) Waits V. Fraser (1835) 7 C. & P. 369; 7 A. & E. 223. (d) Baldwin v. Elphinston (1775) 2 W. Bl. 1037; criticised
(b)
in
Watts
v.
(f)
But in the same case (7 C. & P. 369) the printer was held (see also Johnson v. Hudson, infra). Johnson v. Hudson (1836) i H. & W. 680. Shackell V. Rosier (1856) 2 Bing. N. C. 634. Day V. Bream (1837) 2 Moo. & Rob. 54. Emmens v. Pottle (1885) 16 Q. B. D. 354. Mcleod V. St. Auhyn [1899] A. C. 549, (P. C). Fizetelly v. Mudie [1900] 2 Q. B. 170.
.
Who may
sue
1000.
It is
have
in-
plaintiff,
or any other
by
is it
when he published
a person to
it
('^)
;
if,
whom
it
made concerning
the
plaintiff.^'')
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
(a)
507
Bromage Haire v.
Harrison
v.
Prosser (1825) 4 B.
fFilson (1829) 9 B.
v. v.
&
The Queen
ill
will, is
[These cases show beyond question that malice, in the sense of not a necessary ingredient in a, defamatory statement.]
Shepheard v. Whitaker (1875) L! R. 10 C. P. 502. Fizetelly v.Mudie [1900] 2 Q.B., at p. 178, />fr Vaughan Williams, L.J. (c) Hulton V. Jones [1910] A. C. 20. (d) SaJgrove v. Hole [igoi] 2 K. B. I (C. A.). Hulton V. JoneSf ubi sup.
(b)
[Where the ordinary reader would attribute the imputation to a wholly irriaginary person or a literary type, the statement would probably be held to be not defamatory (see Harrison v. Smith, supra). Whether, if there were two actual persons, with regard to one of whom the statement could be justified, the other would be deprived of his action, seems doubtful.]
Repetition
by a
make
J'^^ ^
liable to
(*^
was
made
in
pursuance of a moral or
legal obligation, or
was authorized or intended by the original utterer, or was the natural consequence of the original utterance.^'')
But such
third person
(a)
is
himself
liable.^'^^
Ward v. Weeks (1830) 7 Bing. 211. Parkins v. Scott (1862) i H. & C. 153. (b) Derry v. Handley (1867) 16 L. T. 263. Speight V. Gosnay (1891) 60 L. J. Q. B. 231. (c) McPherson v. Daniels (1829) 10 B. & C. 263. Watkin V. Hall (1868) L. R. 10 Q. B. 396.
[There was formerly a doctrine that, if the words were actionable se, and the person who repeated them gave the name of the original author, he (the repeater) was not liable; inasmuch as the
per
Digitized
by Microsoft
5o8
party defamed could sue the original utterer {Northampton's Case (1613) 12 Rep. 134). But this doctrine was repudiated in McPherson
V.
when
Daniels (ubi sup.). And the doctrine, apparently, never applied the repetition took the form of a libel {McGregor v. Thwaites (1824) 3 B. & C. 24; Tidman v. Ainslie (1854) 10 Exch. 63).]
Innuendo
"^
is
reasonably capable
if
a special deit
is
attributed to
by the
is
whether
it is is
in the circum-
a question of
Mulligan
Capital
&
Nevill
V.
Cole (1875) L. R. 10 Q. B. 549. Counties Bank v. Henty (1882) L. R. 7 App. Ca. 74I. Fine Arts Co. [1897] A. C. 68.
v.
Bank
Beswick
V.
Smith (1907)
XXIV
mere
Bank v. Henty appears to show, that the defamatory interpretation might conceivably be put upon the statement does not compel the Court to leave the
[Capital and Counties
fact that a
(b)
v. Malcolmson (1848) I H. L. C. 637. Williams V. Smith (1888) 22 Q. B. D. 134. Australian Newspaper Co. y. Bennett [1894] A. C. 284 (P. C). Linotype Co. v. British Empire Co. (1899) 81 L. T. 331 (H. L.). Dakhyl V. Lahouchere [1908] 2 K. B. 325 n. (H. L.).
Le Fanu
"
Jones
V.
not, in the ordinary acceptation of words defamatory of the plaintiff, the latter must, in his pleadings, allege the special imputation which he attributes to it {innuendo) ; and, if he fails to prove this imputation, he will be defeated {Cox v. Cooper (1863) 9 L. T. 329; Watkin v. Hall (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B., at p. 402, per Blackburn, J.; Ruel v. Tatnell For examples of imputations held to be (1880) 43 L. T. 507). defamatory, see Addendum I (p. 524).]
[Where a statement
it
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
1003.
terest
is
509
public inFair
fair
not defamatory
even
if it
tends to preju-
comment
dice, or
imputes blame
to,
the
plaintiff/'')
But an un-
defendant
is
4 Q. B. 73. (1887) 20 Q. B. D. 275. McQuire v. Western Morning News [1903] 2 K. B. 100. Hunt V. Star Newspaper Co. [1908] 2. B. 309. (b) Digby V. Financial News [1907] I K. B. 502.
v.
^ason
f^alter (1868) L. R.
Merivale
v.
Canon
Hunt
(c)
V.
Star
Newspaper
Walker v. Hodgson [1909] I K. B., at p. 251. Campbell v. Spottiswoode (1863) 3 B. & S. 769. Joynt V. Cycle Trade Co. [1904] 2 K. B. 292. Digby V. Financial News, ubi sup.
Hunt
(d)
V.
Star
v.
Newspaper
Thomas
Bradbury Agnew
[It is now common, where the alleged defamation consists partly of facts stated by the defendant, and partly of comments thereon, for the defendant to plead that the facts stated were true and that the rest of the statement was fair comment. Such a pleading really raises two issues, viz. (a) the truth of the facts stated, and (b) the nature of the comment thereon; and the defendant is entitled to have these submitted separately to the jury (Dakhyl v. Lahouchere [1907] A. C. reported in [1908] 2 K. B. 325 n.). Such a pleading is but the defendant is not, technically, a plea of 'justification'; entitled to interrogate the plaintiff with a view to establishing the
{Walker v. Hodgson [1909] i K. B. 239). If the facts in the were alleged by the defendant, and the issue is found against him, the defendant cannot succeed. But, if the facts were stated by the plaintiff himself (Digby v. Financial News, ubi sup.), or, possibly, if they were contained in a communication which the defendant was privileged to publish on the same occasion (Mangena Wright [1909] 2 K. B. 958), the question of their truth is V. immaterial. For examples of matters held to be of public interest,
first
first
issue
issue
see
Addendum
II (p. 525).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
510
Court and
jury
of public
interest/^J*
and
whether a comment
is
Whether a comis
ment
is,
a question of
The onus
is
commented upon
defendant;
unfair,, is
(a)
one of public
on the
is
comment
on the
p. 143, per
South Hetton Coal Co. v. N. E. News Association [1894] Lord Esher, M. R. (b) Henwood v. Harrison (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 606. McQuire v. Western Morning News [1903] 2 K. B. lOO.
Q.
B., at
Hunt
(c)
V.
V.
Star
Dighy
Financial
Walker
v.
Hodgson,
Imputation
not defamatory
1005.
though
it
An
is
imputation which
is
made
maliciously,
damage
t
to the plaintiff,
cahnot be
made
the ground of
an action of Defamation.
Miller
V.
David (1874) L. R. 9 C.
V.
Mulligan
Capital Nevill V.
&
P. 118.Cole (1875) L. R. 10 Q. B. 549. Counties Bank v. Henty (1882) L. R. 7 App. Ca. 741. Fine Arts Co. [1897] A. C. 68.
Hubbuck
V.
Wilkinson [1899]
Q.
B., at p. 92.
slander of
torts are
[Such statements may, of course, amount to other torts, e. g. title or goods {ante, 853, 893), interferfence with trade
But these or business or contractual relations {ante, 963, 964). governed by their own special rules. See the point carefully explained by Vaughan Williams, L. J., in Dockrell v. Dougall,
ubi sup., at p. 558.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
1006.
511
Justifica-
defendant
may
and
'justify
the publication of a
was true
in substance
Alexander
v.
in fact.
N.
&
S. 340.
1007. In order
the defendant
truly stated,
oj
facts
were
{in-
Smith
V.
Helsham
m.
[A defendant cannot
{Fleming v. I Q. B., at
justify a part of a
defamatory statement;
[1893]
privi- Absolute
P"'"'"^'
e.,
so soon as the
defendant proves
that
is
the
statement
which
is
is
the
judgment:
(i)
such a statement, he
entitled
Statements
made
in
the
course
of parlia-
of Rights (1689)
s.
i.
[The question whether a similar privilege extends to the debates and proceedings of colonial parliaments, is settled by a reference to local law (see Doyle v. Falkener (1866) L. R. i P. C, at p. 339, and Fielding V. Thomas [1896] A. C. 600 (P. C.)).]
S
Digitized
by Microsoft
5U
(ii)
of the petition
Lake \
V.
King (1668)
Wms.
Saund. 131
b.
does not follbw that a publication of copies of the petition members of the House or committee would be privileged (See Flint v. Pike (1825) 4 B. C. 423).]
[But
it
&
(iii)
enquiry,
made by
and
parties,^*)
judges,('')
advocates,^*')
witnesses,^"^) in the
course
&
N.
569.
(b)
'
Hodson
V.
Pare
[1899]'
Q. B. 455.
[For the limits of this privilege, see 750 (ante)j The privilege of a judge extends not only to persons technically so-called, but to all persons acting in a judicial capacity, e. g. coroners {Thomas v. Churton (1862) 2 B. & S. 475), magistrates {Hodson v. Pare {ubi sup.); Law v. Llewellyn [1906] I K. B. 487), members of a court martial {Jekyll v. Moore (1806) 2 Bos. & P. (N. R.) 341) or a military court of enquiry {Home v. Beniinck (1820) 2 Br. B. 130), and
&
official receivers
{Bottomley v.
Brougham
Aquarium
v.
Parkinson
[1892]
(c)
p.
B., at p. 443).}
V. Scarlett v.
v.
Hodgson
Munster
(1818)
B.
& Aid.
232 (counsel).
Lamb
(d)
J
Dawkins
Seaman
enquiry).
v. Netkerclift
Barratt v.
(1876) 2 C. P. D. 53. Q. B. D. 307 (parliamentary committee). Kearns [1905] I K. B. 504 (statutory commission).
[The privilege extends to statements made by an intending witness to the solicitors of a party for the purpose of preparing a proof {Watson v. McEwan [1905] A. C. 40), and to statements similarly made by a persQi^ vyho may or not be a witness in contemplated proceedings {Beresjbrii v White (1914) T. L. R. 591).]
.
XXX
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
(iv)
513
and
2.
(The mar-
(v)
Statements being
fair
reports of proceedings
fore
heard be-
judicial authority,
Law
Hope
of Libel
V.
Amendment
Act, 1888,
s.
3.
[The Act expressly refrains from authorizing the publication of blasphemous or indecent matter. As to what amounts to " proceedings" for the purposes of this statute, see Furniss v. Cambridge Daily News, Ld. (1907) XXIII T. L. R. 705. It has been doubted whether
the intention of the legislature
privilege in this case
;
was to confer absolute or only qualified but the words of the section seem clear.]
(vi)
made by
the de-
an
on the
Dawkins
diss.).
v.
&
S.
768 (Cockburn, C. J.
(vii)
official
to
another.
Chatterton v. Sec. of State for India [1895] 2 Q. B. 189.
whom
S2
Digitized
by Microsoft
514
Qualified
prwtege
e.,
the the
is
such a statement,
will
be
enti-
fact depriving
tioned
him of
privilege as
is
hereinafter
men-
(i)
Statements being
if
the plaintiff
it
V. Walter (1868)
(ii)
reports,
papers,
votes,
to
or
proceedings
published.
ordered
by
Parliament
be
will
be privileged,
that
it
show
was
v. Lloyi (1908) XXIV T. L. R. 610 (reversed, but only on the T. L. R. 26). Mangena v. Wright [1909] 2 K. B. 958. Parliamentary Papers Act, 1840, s. 3. (Note the very unusual provision which lays the onus of disproving malice on the defendant.)
facts,
XXV
v.
Perry (1895)
(iii)
of,
or ex-
from,
registers
of judicial
proceed-
ings, kept
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
tory right of access.
will
515
be privileged,
it
if
that
Fleming
Jones
V. v.
Newton (1848)
H. L. C. 363.
(C. A.).
Qucere as to other
official registers, e. g.
of Sale.]
(iv)
Statements being
fair
is
admitted) of any
warrant or authority, or of
select
liberative
by any govofficer
ernment
State,
stable,
office
or
department,
of
commissioner of
or his request.
be privileged,
will
Digitized
by Microsoft
5i6
plaintiff
proves that
it
was published
defendant has
maliciously; or
(b) the plaintiff proves that the
been requested
to insert in the
newspaper a
re-
or
the statement
is
or contains blasphemous or
is
indecent matter, or
not for
pubhc
benefit;
]paw,of Libel
Amendment
Act, 1888,
s.
4.
[For the purposes of this sub-paragraph, "public meeting" means any meeting bona pie and lawfully held for a lawful purpose, and for the furtherance or discussion of any matter of public concern; whether the admission thereto be general or restricted. Representatives of the Press can only be excluded from, the meetings of a local authority by express resolution having a temporary effect
(Local Authorities (Admission of the Press to Meetings) Act, 1908,
s.
I).]
(v)
newspaper
re-
be
it
Levy (1858) E. B. & E. 537. Hales (1878) 3 C. P. D. 319. Macdougall v. Knight (1889) L. R. 14 App. Ca. 194. Kimber v. Press Association [1893] i Q. B. 65.
Lewis
v.
TJsiU V.
ante,
[This sub-paragraph must, of course, be read with 1008 (v) which gives absolute protection to contemporaneous news-
paper reports.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
(b) Stevens v. Sampson (1879) 5 Ex. D. 53. case by Bramwell, B., that such statements, if
privileged, even
(It
517
was suggested
in this
made by
a regular news-
paper reporter to his employers in the ordinary course of business, would be though malicious. See this case, at p. 56.)
is fair and accurate, is a question need not comprise the whole of the proceedings; if the omissions do not tehd to mislead {Macdougall v. Knight,
[Whether
a particular report
It
(vi)
tween
solicitor
and
client/^^
or
between
solicitor
and
counsel/''^ or
between two or
solicitor/'^^
more
clients
of commencing
spect of which he
such privilege
(a)
^''^
;
(b)
but
it
is
con-
ceived that
(c)
must be
v.
correct.
(d)
Browne Browne
v.
Dunn, Dunn,
Lord Bowen.
[See note to 1008 (iii.) as to statements made by witnesses to the solicitor for the purpose of preparing the case. In Boxsius v. Goblet Frires [1894] l Q. B. 842, it was held that communications which would be privileged if made directly by a solicitor are none the less privileged because they have been shown to clerks of the But malice will destroy solicitor in the ordinary course of business.
such privilege.]
(vii)
Digitized
by Microsoft
5i
pursuance of a
moral duty/*^
to another person
who
manner which
z. e.,
are reason-
not calculated
plaintiff
than
was necessary
will
if
was published
Aid. 642. C. M. & R. 181. B'lackham v. Pugh (1846) 2 C. B. 611. B. 344. Harrison v. Bush (1855) 5 E. Whiteleyv. Adams (1863) 15 C. B. N. S. 392. Baker v. Carrick [1894] I Q. B. 838.
v,
Fairman
ToogQod
Ives ,{l%zz) 5 B.
&
V.
Spyring (1834)
&
[An interest or duty arising out of a relationship entered into merely for the purpose of making pecuniary profit, is not an interest or duty within this {Macintosh v. Dun [1908] A. C. 391 (P. C.)). The defendant must show that the alleged duty is founded upon considerations of the welfare of society as a whole, not of a mere section of it (Greenlands v. Wilmshurst [191 3] 3 K. B. 507). Blackham V. Pugh and Baker v. Carrick appear to suggest, that a communication bona fide made for the protection of the person making it is privileged; even though the person to whom it was made had no corresponding interest or duty. But see Hehditch v. Mcllwaine
(infra).]
(b)
Harrison
v.
that there
is
Stuart V, Bell [1891] 2 Q. B. 341. y, Mcllwaine [1894] 2 Q. B. 54. (This case shows no privilege merely because the defendant thought that the
Hehditch
person to
whom
Edmondson
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
(c)
i C. M. R. 250. (1851) 10 C. B. 583. Clark V. Molyneux (1877) 3 Q. B. D. 237.
519
Warren
v.
Warren (1834)
Somerville v.
Hawkins
Jenoure v. Delmege [1891] A. C. 73 (P. C). Royal Aquarium Co. v. Parkinson [1892] I Q. B. 431.
Addendum
(viii)
Statements
made
in self-defence, in
answer to
be
it
will
privileged,
was published
(a)
v. Gasson (1858) E. B. & E. 346. Laughton v. B. of S odor and Man (1872) L. R. 4 P. C. 495. (b) Huntley v. Ward (1859) 6 C. B. N. S. 514. (It appears from case, that irrelevance in a statement will entitle the Court to find malice
Hemmings
this
as a
the jury
may
Charles (1905)
XXI
justify a Court
{"'^^
am
privilege, and whether there is evidence of claim of r o ' malice, are questions for the Court. Whether such cir-
!"
privilege
cumstances
exist,
is
or
is
not in fact
Cooke
V.
&
'
dence of malice.) Clark V. Molyneux (1877) 3 Q. B. D. 237. Hehditch v, Mcllwaine (1894) 2 Q. B., at p. 58, per Lord Esher,
M.
R.
S3
Digitized
by Microsoft
526
Malice of
''g^nt
claimed in respect
them.
Citizens' Life
Assurance Co.
v.
Broibn [1904] A.
C,
Lord Lindley
Smith V.
(principal
and
agent).
Streatjield
Apology and
ainen s
1012. In
aji
and that a
full
before the
commencement of the
any newspaper or
Such plea must
periodical selected
by the
plaintiff.
^^^
way
(a)
of amends. ^''^
Libel Act, 1843, Libel Act, 1845,
s. 2.
s-
(b)
2.
(The
sum
paid
i
in,
Devon
Q. B.
[The defendant may plead justification as to one part of a libel, and apology and payment into Court under the Libel Acts as to another (Hawksley v. Bradshaw (1880) 5 Q. B. D. 302). But he must show clearly which part he justifies and which he admits {Oxley V. Wilkes [1898] 2 Q. B. 56). Payment into Court, accompanied by apology, under the Libel Acts, must be carefully distinguished from ordinary payment into Court under the Judicature Acts (O. XXIL r. i), which operates only in mitigation of damages {Fleming v. Dollar (1889) 23 Q. B. D. 388).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
1013.
521
Corporations
or be sued in an action
is
of Defamation/")
really
an Zi
^'^""""
v.
Hawkins
South Hetton Coal Co. v. N. 133 (plaintiff and defendant). Citizens' Life Assurance Co. v. Brown [1904] A. C. 423 (P. C.) (defendant).
[It seems now that even an unincorporated body, other than a trade union, may be sued in Defamation {Richards v. Bartram (1908) T. L. R. 181). Quaere : if it could sue.]
&
&
XXV
(b)
Mayor
Q. B.
94.
may
be given in an action
Vindictive
and
""^"^ '
conduct
may be
proved
of damages. ^^^
But
jury
if
cause of
Praed v. Graham (1889) 24 Q. B. D. 53. Anderson v. Calvert (1908) XXIV T. L. R. 399. (b) Pearson v. Lemaitre (1843) 5 M. 8e G. 700.
J
Mitigation
^
"mages
Scott V.
Sampson (1882) 8 Q. B. D.
Wood
V. -E. of
Durham
Digitized
by Microsoft
522
(ii)
&
(iii)
was not
in
Pearson v. Lemaitre (1843) 5 M. & G. 700. Smith V. Scott (1847) 2 C. & K., at p. 585, per Coleridge,
J.
(ix)
made
or offered an apology
commencement of such action, or, if such action was commenced before he had an opportunity of making or
to the plaintiff before the
so.
I.
Common
rumour
1016. Evidence
common
rumour,
But a
defendant
a statement avowedly as
show
it/*"^
Scott V.
Sampson (1882)
v.
(b)
Saunders
Buncombe
8 Q. B. D., at p. 503. Mills (1829) ^ Bing., at p. 220. v. Daniell (1838) 2 Jurist, 32.
Proceedings aliunde
1017. At the
in
trial
of an action for a
libel
contained
in evidence.
Digitized
by Microsoft
DEFAMATION
in mitigation
523
recovered or brought actions for damages, or has received or agreed to receive compensation, in respect of a
libel
for
Amendment
Act, 1888,
s. 6.
1018. (Semble) a
fused
to live
has
re- Remoteness
"'
with her
consequence of a defamatory
her, cannot, in
"'""^^
statement
made concerning
an action of
12.
was based on
a charge of unchastity),
was
:
there
a ground of action without proof of special damage. Qucere the point been affected by the Slander of Women Act, 1891 ?
Has
Loss
of hospitality has, however, been allowed to rank as special damage (Moore V. Meagher (1807) I Taunt. 39). It was held in Allsop v. Allsop (i860) 5 H. & N. 534, that ill health caused by slander was too remote a consequence to support an allegation of special damage. But see now Wilkinson v. Downton [1897], 2 Q. B, 57 Dulieu v. White [1901] 2 K. B. 669 ; Janvier v. Sweeney [1919] 2 K. B. 316.]
;
Digitized
by Microsoft
Addendum
to Section VIII
The following may be quoted as examples of imputations which have been held to be defamatory; but it is obvious that no exhaustive list can be given, and that changes may be expected as public opinion varies. For this reason, later authorities are to be preferred to older on this point.
A. Imputations actionable per
1.
se.
The commission of
death or imprisonment.
87 (forgery). & W. 564 (bigamy). Leymqrt v. Latimer (1877) 3 Ex. D. 352 ("convicted felon"). Webb V. Beavan (1883) II Q. B. D. 609 , , ,, (.generally;. Marks V. Samuel [1904] 2 K. B. 287 J
V.
Jones
Heme
(1.759) 2 Wils.
Heming
v.
Power (1842) 10 M.
"I
[Imputation of mere suspicion of crime is not actionable per se V. Mashford (1851) 6 Exch. 539; Simmons v. Mitchell (1880) L. R. 6 App. Ca. 156 (P. C.)).]
(Tozer
2.
contagious disease.
Fillers V. Monsley (1769) 2 Wils. 403. Carslake v. Mapledoram (1788) 2 T. R. 473. Bloodworth v. Gray (1844) 7 M. G. 334. JVatkin V. Hall (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B., at p. 399, per Blackburn, {CarsJ. lake V. Mapledoram decides that this imputation, to be actionable, must refer to the time when the statement was made).
&
3.
&
Gallwey
clergyman).
v.
in a beneficed
Digitized
by Microsoft
ADDENDUM
525
Bignell v. Buzzard (1858) 3 H. & N. 217 (keeping a "disorderly house" by a licensed victualler). Irwin V. Brandwood (1864) 2 H. & C. 960 (drunkenness in master of a
ship).
i>
Skepheard v. IVhitaker (1875) L. R. 10 C. P. 502 (insolvency in a trader). South Hetton Co. v. N. E. News [1894] i Q. B. 133 (unsanitary cottages of colliery company).
B.
Imputations which
(if
Insanity.
Morgan
Weldon
v. V.
5. General immorality or misconduct, not amounting to crime, but tending to cause persons to shun the society of the plaintiff.
I'anson v. Stuart (1787) I T. R. 748 ("swfindler"). Aid. 685 (callousness). Churchill v. Hunt (18x9) 2 B. Edwards v. Bell (1824X1 Bing. 403 ("invective from pulpit").
&
Clement v. Chivis (1829) 9 B. & C. 172 (insulting women). Ayre v. Craven (1834) A. & E. 2 (adultery of physician). Greville v. Chapman (1844) 5 Q. B. 731 (unfair racing). O'Brien v. Clement (1846) 16 M. & W. 159 ("consorting with
blacklegs").
James Hoare
v.
v. Silverlock (1848) 12
Cox
6.
V.
Brook (1846) 9 Q. B. 7 (immorality in a police Q. B. 628 ^"g""*"''^^ | ^^^^^i^^^^. Lee (1869) L. R. 4 Ex. 284 )
officer).
Abp. of Tuam v. Robeson (1828) 5 Bing. Cook V. Ward (1830) 6 Bing. 409.
Addendum
II
to Section VIII
Digitized
by Microsoft
526
two extreme
(1846) 15
seem
to lie
in Gathercole v.
Miall
M.
& W.
Case {supra).
319, and, on the other, in the South Hettoti In the first case, it was held that the administration of
a purely local charity for purposes not parochial, but for the propagation of a particular form of worship, was not a matter of public interest. In the second, it was held that the sanitary condition of pitmen's cottages on the plaintiff's property, was a matter of public" interest. The question is discussed fully in the dissenting judgment of Grove, J., in Henwpod v. Harrison (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 606.
cases seem to fall into two more or less distinct classes as out below; but the general principle appears to be, that where persons by their position, publications, or profession, invite public criticism, their acts and their writings are matters of public interest.
set
I. All literary or artistic, productions, arid all other written matter published to the world, and the conduct of all persons who by their professions either expressly or implicitly invite comment.
The
Esp. 28 (theatrical performance). M, M. 74 (architect's work). Thompson v. Shackell (1828) i M. & M. 187 (work of a painter). Paris V. Levy (i860) 9 C. B. N. S. 342 (advertisement). Campbell v. Spottiswoode (1863) 3 B. S. 769 (missionary scheme). Merivale \. Carson (1887) 20 Q. B. D, 275 (stage-play). Dakhyl V. Labouchere (H. L.) reported [1908] 2 K. B. 325 n. (conduct of
i
&
&
advertising doctor).
i.'
The
ticians, rriembers
concerned
in the
Law.
Dunne
v. Anderson (1825) 3 Bing. 88 (petition to Parliament). Gathercole v. Miall (1846) 15 M. W. 31 9 (sermons, (/ijj-. Parke, B.). Kelly V. Tinling (1865) L. R. I Q. B. 699 (conduct of public worship). Wason V. Walter (i868) L. R. 4 Q. B. 73 (petition to Parliament).
&
Henwood v. Harrison (1872) L. R. 7 C. P. 606 (plans for public safety submitted to the Admiralty). Davis v. Duncan (1874) L. R. 9 C. P. 396 (conduct at political meeting). Purcell V. Soulier (1877) 2 C. P. D. 215 (administration of Poor Law). South Hetton Coal Co. v. N. E. News, ubi sup, (sanitation of houses of pitmen belonging to a large colliery).
[This last case seems somewhat of an extensidn of the rule unwe may say that the quiestion really concerns the public health.]
;
less
Digitized
by Microsoft
ADDENDUM
Addendum
III
527
to Section VIII
The following are examples of statements in respect of which the defendant has been held entitled to claim qualified privilege on the ground of interest or duty.
1.
Statements
made
in the course
of public duty.
Taylor v.
count).
Hawkins
1st
Waller
Society).
v.
Loch (1881) L. R.
v.
Parkinson [1892]
i
Q. B. 431 (speech
at
County
Andrews
v.
Nott-Bower [1895]
J. P.
Statements
made
in
Baker
3.
Stuart v. Bell [1891] 2 Q. B. 341 (statement as to servant's character). v. Carrick [1894] I Q. B. 838 (letter by solicitor).
Statements
v.
made
in
I
pursuance of
A.
( ?
common)
interest.
J.
Knight
Wilson
Gibbs (1834)
&
Lord Denman, C.
Amann
Fdrce
V.
V.
v.
Hunt
Robinson (1845) 7 Q. B. 68 (partners). Damm (i860) 8 C. B. N. S. 597 (merchant and customer). Warren (1864) 15 C. B. N. S. 806 (enquiry to obtain evidence). G. N. R. [1891] 2 Q. B. 189 (master and servant).
this
V.
[Perhaps accusations of crime against the defendant fall under head {Toogood v. Spyring (1834) i C. M. & R. i8i; Padmore E. 380). But in neither of these cases Lawrence (1840) II A.
&
in
common
4.
Statements
made
in
answer to enquiries.
Weatherston v. Hawkins (1786) I T. R. no (as to servant's character). Child V. Affleck (1829) 9 B. & C. 403 (as to servant's character). Taylor v. Hawkins (1851) 16 Q. B. 308 (as to servant's character. 2nd
count).
Digitized
by Microsoft
528
[The fact that the defendant volunteered a communication of a kind which would have been privileged if made in answer to an enquiry may, be evidence of malice but it does not destroy the privi;
&
C. 578).]
5.
Statements
made
in
rebuttal
of allega'tions
against
the
defendant.
Croft V. Stevens (1862) 7 H.
&
N.
570.
(Irish case).
Jacob
V.
[But
in
not at liberty to
make
entirely
C. B. N. S. 514).]
!,-i\
M!i
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION IX
TORTS IN RESPECT OF PUBLIC RIGHTS, EXECUTION, AND DISTRESS
1019.
or
An action for damages lies when, by statute common law, the plaintiff is entitled to demand the
official,
Refusal of
"^'"
and
&
Tozer V. Child (1857) 7 E. B. 377. Fotherby v. Metro. Ry. Co. (1866) L. R. 2 C. P., at p. 194. Pickering v. James (1873) L. R. 8 C. P. 489.
v. Goldsmid [1894] I Q. B., at p. 189. Marquis of Bristol v. Beck (1906) 96 L. T. 55 (where, however, the action was dismissed on the merits).
&
Chaffers
seems clear from the decisions (e. g. Tozer v. JChild, ubi sup.) the defendant is acting in a quasi-judicial capacity, proof of malice on his part is essential; otherwise, when he is acting ministerially {Pickering v. fames, 'ubi sup., at p. 503). The duties which ai^ the subject of this action must be distinguished from the statutory duties imposed (not necessarily on public officials) for the benefit of individuals. As to these, see ante, 726.]
[It
that
when
1020.
An
action for
damages
lies
against a sheriff
^^^
Misconduct
'''"''^ failure,<^) *^
which
either
he or his subordinate
tion, or
^s)
by
Digitized
by Microsoft
530
by such
(a) The sheriff and not the subordinate is the proper person to be sued; even when the offence has been actually committed by the subordinate {Cameron V. Reynolds (1776) Cowp. 403). (For other remedies against the sheriff, see Sheriffs Act, 1887, s. 29, which, however, appears to contemplate also liability of the subordinate.) (b) Burton v. Le Gros (1864) 34 L. J. Q. B. 91; County Courts Act, (For other remedies against the high bailiff, see ss. 50-52 of 1888, s. 35.
the Act.)
(c)
(d)
&
(e)
Pike
summary
&
Raphael v. Goodman (1838) ibid. 565 (fraudulent exaction of bond). Hooper v. Lane (1857) 6 H. L. C. 443. (g) The subordinate need not even have been actually appointed by the sheriff. It is sufficient if he has been appoirited by the sheriff's deputy.
(Gregory
(h)
(i)
v. Cotterell
(1855) 5 E.
&
B. 571.)
"]
Bing.
^Z%\
J
,,
,.
,.
M.
& W.
16
(.'^ndlord).
/,
.,
Watson
V.
Lancashire
-.s
^'^^''""^
6H. &N.
502.
common
(k)
of
all.]
Williams v. Mostyn (1838) 4 M. & W. 145. Wylie v. Birch (1843) 4 Q. B. 566. Hobson V. Thelluson (1867) L. R. 2 Q. B. 642.
(There was formerly an exception where the defendant had a debtor in custody on final process at the suit of the plaintiff, and allowed him to escape. In such a case, it was not necessary to prove
damage; even though the escape was only temporary {Planck v. Anderson (1792) 5 T. R., at p. 40, per BuUer, J.); and, if the action was framed in Debt, the plaintiff recovered the whole debt and sheriff's poundage (Jones v. Pope (1667) Wms. Saund. 37, n. 2). 'A similar rule seems to have applied where the ground of action
Digitized
by Microsoft
531
See
Hooper (1844) 6 Q. B.
468).
now
i6.)
officers in
plaintiff complains of the conduct of the sheriff or his executing process taken out by him (the plaintiff), he must, of course, show the validity of the process {Lane v. Chapman E. 966). But proof of the existence of an apparently (1840) II A. regular judgment by which his conduct was justified at the time, is
[Where the
&
judgment
a conclusive answer to an action against the sheriff; even though the is afterwards set aside {Ives v. Lucas (1823) i C. P. 7).
&
When
amounts
to Trespass, of course
no damage
need be proved.]
1021.
creditot at
whose
has wrong-
Liability of
fully seized goods, is not liable for the seizure to the /'''"""/
;^''^
by imIn the
he
v.
is
Wilson
Tumman
M.
&
G. 236.
(b)
Balme
v.
the execution
was of
at p. 478, per Patteson, (Where J. the person, the creditor was usually liable; because the
named therein {Parsons v. Loyd (1772) 3 Wils. 341). But, even in such a case, it seems that he would not have been responsible for the sheriff's mistake of identity, or improper mode of arrest.)
the body of the person
(c)
Humphrys
ment on the
in
v. Pratt (1831) 5 Bligh, N. S. 154. (But a mere indorsewrit for the information of the sheriff is not a direction to seize
accordance therewith {Childersv. Wooler (i860) 2 E. & E. 287); though subsequent ratification may make the creditor liable {Jarmain v. Hooper (1843) 6 M. & G. 827).)
1022.
An
outgoing sheriff
is
Outgoing
larities, in
'^'"f
Digitized
by Microsoft
532
him
of such term;
such writs
to his successor/*'
A sheriff
from
cannot be called
upon
six
to
make
months from
(As to what writs are "completely ex(a) Sheriffs Act, 1887, s. 28 (l). ecuted," see Harrison y. Panyter (1840) 6 M. W. 387). (b) Ibid. s. 28 (3).
&
Excessive or
irregular
distress
1023.
or
is
guilty of
any
irregularity in the
conduct of such
.other
('"
distress/^^ is liable to
an action by such
to re-
cover the
excess or irregularity,
and
to
an injunction
(a) If the defendant, is not entitled to distrain at all, he will be a mere wrong-doer; and the remedies of the plaintiff will be Trespass {ante. Sect. Ill, Tit. I), Conversion {ibid.. Tit. .II), or Replevin {ante, 867), in the first two of which he will recover the full value of the goods, and in the third the goods themselves. A similar result follows if the defendant, though entitled to distrain on the plaintiff's goods, forcibly breaks open the plaintiff's house
(Attack
distress
Bramwell (1863) 3 B. & S. 520), or seizes goods privileged from {Keen v. Priest (1859) 4 H. & N. 236). (b) 52 Hen. III. (Statute of Marlbridge, ann. 1267) st. I, c. 4, s. 5. Hutchinson v. Chambers (1758) I Burr., at p. 590.
V.
Piggott
V. Birtles
(1836)
M.
& W.
441.
Roden
V.
is
[There must be excessive seizure. Merely claiming too much rent not sufficient; unless special damage follows {Tancred v; Leyland (1851) 16 Q. B. 669, overruling Taylor v. Henniker (1840) 12 A. & E. 488). On the other hand, when there has been excessive seizure,
{Chandler
(c)
slight evidertce
v.
of damage will be sufficient to support the action Doulton (1865) 3 H. & C. 553).]
Rent Act, 1737,
s.
Distress for
19.
the
e.
according to
Digitized
by Microsoft
533
v. Morgan (i8og) ii East, 395). But, in neither form of action would the plaintiff recover unless he proved
damage {Rodgers
v.
distress
[Prior to the Act of 1737, any irregularity in the conduct of a made the distrainor a trespasser ab initio. (See preamble
to the section.)]
person interested in the goods may bring the action {Keen v. Fell v. TFhittaker (1871) L. R. 7 Q. B. 120). (e) An injunction against a landlord will only be granted under special circumstances, and with strict precautions {Shaw v. E. of Jersey (1879)
(d)
Any
exist
under the
Law
of Distress
Amendment
s.
Act, 1895,
s.
4,
and the
30.]
1024.
damages
lies
against a
relief
Distress for
of
^^
damage sustained by
Rent Act,
19, abolishes the doctrine of trespass ah initio in this case 1737, also. County, rural district, and borough rates are collected through
Digitized
by Microsoft
534
any corresponding proviwhich are collected by the sanitary authorities; and, presumably, any irregularity in a distress for such rates would make the distrainor a trespasser ab initio (see Public Health Act, 1875, s. 256, and Mutton v. Hornsey D. C, reported in The Times of 12th April, 1899).]
to them.
Rescous
1025.
person
who
Pound Breach
to recover
damages and
It is
of law.
plaintiff's title to
was well-founded or
not.^'^
distrained
if
M.
& W.
564.
[But
distrained, the
owner may
seize
them
v.
& 3 W. &
law of
M.
(1689)
altered the
trainor.
is still
(This was the statute which by conferring a power of sale on the disthe distrainor could merely impound; knd this
St. I. c. 5. s. 3.
damage
s.
feasant.
VI,
180.)
special action
on the statute
lies for
in the
hands of the
2;
Tates
Eastwood (1851)
6 Exch. 805).
Double amages
been
Digitized
by Microsoft
535
&
3
to
W.
&
M.
(1689)
St. I, c.
5,
due
him (the defendant), the plaintiff may recover as damages double the value of the goods so distrained,
together with
(full) costs
of
suit.
I, c. 5, s. 4.
(The
Digitized
by Microsoft
SECTION X
DECEIT
Definition
1027.
person
who
fraudulently
fact,
makes
to another
a representation false in
deceived,
is
liable to
an action of Deceit
to re-
Freeman (1789) 3 T. R.
51.
Bates (1855) 2 E. B., at pp. 488-9, per Behn V. Kemble (1859) 7 C. B. N. S. 260. Derry v. Peek (1889) L. R. 14 App. Ca. 337.
Gerhard
v.
&
Lord Campbell, C.
J.
[The action of Deceit has had a curious history. The old common law writ, as Fitzherbert tells us {Natura Brevium, 95 E), and, as the still older authorities (e. g. the Old Natura Brevium (fF. 50-52) and a very beautiful and complete MS. Register attributed to the reign of Henry IV in the Library of the Law Society (105 H) at ff. 130-5) show, was practically restricted to personation or other Not unnaturally, trickery in connection with legal proceedings. there was much dispute whether it was really an original writ at all, or merely a judicial writ issuing from the Court in which the in other words, whether personation or trickery had been practised it was not in the nature of a proceeding for contempt of Court. Fitzherbert {op. cit. 99 G) took the view, that either form of writ was available to a party to the proceedings in which the deceit was practised; and this view, with modifications, was accepted in the late seventeenth century case of Zouch v. T hompson (1695) 3 Lev. Even by Fitzherbert's time, however, we see {op. cit. 98 K) 419. that the writ is being extended by analogy to what we should now call breach of warranty; though it is noticeable that a precisely similar writ is classed by Fitzherbert under the head of Trespass on the Case {op. cit. 94 C), and it is clear that allegations of deceit,
Digitized
by Microsoft
DECEIT
537
as well as allegations of negligence, played a considerable part in the development of that form of Trespass on the Case (i. e. Assumpsit)
which ultimately gave us our action of simple contract. (See Somerton's Case Y. B. II Hen. VI (1433), ^- '^> However, by P^- ^-) the adoption of the doctrine of Consideration, Assumpsit became substantially a contractual action, though unnecessary allegations of deceit and negligence continued to be made in it, and, even so late as the year 1778, it could be doubted whether Assumpsit lay for breach of warranty (Stuart v. Wilkins, Douglas, 18). Thus the action of Deceit fell into the background; and an attempt to hold the defendant liable on the ground of deceit in the well-known case of Chandelor v. Lopus (1603) Cro. Jac. 4 (Action on the Case) failed entirely; the Exchequer Chamber (reversing the King's Bench, and against the opinion of Andersdn, C. J.) refusing to allow
the action against a goldsmith for falsely stating that to be a bezar stone which was not. It will be observed, however, that this action
of Chandelor v. Lopus arose out of a sale, and was, in effect, an attempt to base the action upon a mere statement by the vendor which was held not to amount to a warranty, no scienter being alleged. It had been previously noted by Fitzherbert {op. cit. 94 C) that the common law recognized no implied warranty on a sale of goods; and he also admitted (98 K) that not even an express warranty given after a sale could be made the basis of an action of Deceit, It is worth noting that, in the standard printed edition of the Register of Writs (anno 1687) the only example given of Trespass on the Case alleging deceit (falA) machinando, f. 112) is based on circumstances which suggest trespass rather than fraud. And this, notwithstanding that a considered decision of the Court of King's Bench had, a quarter of a century before, recognized the validity of the writ of Deceit on the Case (Leakins v. Clissel (1663) i Sid. 146), and that, two years after the publication of the printed Register, a similar action was allowed by the same Court (Crosse v. Gardner (1689) Carth. 90). These two cases, however, were, in fact though not in form, actions
on
false
statements
made
in relation
Freeman (1789) 3 T. R. 51, which is always looked upon as the origin of the modem action of Deceit, is, that the Court in that case allowed the action in circumstances which could not give rise to an action on contract, and thus finally settled the tortious character of the action of Deceit.
to the actions.
real novelty, then, in Pasley v.
The
After Pasley v. Freeman, the action became enormously popular as a means of evading the Statute of Fi:auds in cases which were really guarantees; and, after several broad hints from the Bench
Digitized
by Microsoft
538
was imposed in that numerous class of which the action was founded on a false representation as to character or credit (Statute of Frauds Amendment Act, 1828, s. 6). The rapid growth of commercial joint-stock cbmpanies in the middle of the nineteenth century, greatly enlarged the application of the action, which was successfully brought against the authors of fraudulent prospectuses; and, though the decision in Derry v. Peek (1889) L. R. 14 App. Ca. 337, put a stop to the extension of the action to negligent as distinguished from fraudulent misrepresentations, the principle laid down in Pasley v. Freeman remains law
the requirement of writing
cases in
to the present day.
is strictly
of Tort.
It should be carefully noted, that this Section confined to deceit as the basis of an independent action The effects of fraud and other forms of misrepresentation
places ( 8r-86, 89-90, 221). Fraud by trustees, and so-called "frauds on powers," will be dealt with in the succeeding Book (Property). Fraud as an element in crime does not fall within the scope of this work.]
'
1028. In order
of action
to succeed in
an action of
De'ceit,
the plaintiff
tation
:
to the represen
(i)
that,
it
was
as to a matter of fact,
and was
made by
Vernon
v.
Keyes (1810) 12 East, 632; afFd. in Error, 4 Taunt. 488. Lord Ebury (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. App. 777. Rainford v. Keith [1905] I Ch. 296.
Beattie v.
[A belief or an intention is as much a matter of fact for this purpose as anything else {Edgington v. Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 Ch. D.,
at p. 483;
Angus
v. Clifford
(ii)
that
it
was made
the plaintiff;
Digitized
by Microsoft
DECEIT
Polhill V. Salter (1832) 3 B. Langridge v. Levy (1837) 2 M.
539
123.
4 M.
& W.
337.
(iii)
it
in the
manner
in
which
he did act;
Langridge v. Levy (1837) 2 M. & W. 519; 4 M. & W. 337. Barry v. Croskey (1861) 2 J. & H. I (approved by the House of Lords Peek V. Gurney (1873) L. R. 6 H. L., at p. 412, per Cairns, C). Andrews v. Mockford [1896] I Q. B. 372.
in
(iv)
that
it
was
(i)
Angus
V. Clifford [1891] 2
Peek, at
p.
it
be true or false"; but immediately proceeds to explain that this is only an example of (2). No degree of negligence will render the defendant liable, if he had an honest belief in the truth of the representation.]
alternative, "recklessly, careless
whether
(v)
Attwood
that
V.
it
plaintiff to
be true
&
F., at p.
[It seems a little doubtful how far the knowledge of the plaintiff's agent will be attributed to the plaintiff for this purpose, especially if the agent was fraudulent (see Cowen v. Simpson (1795) i Esp. It 290, per Lord Kenyoq, C. J. ; and Partnership Act, 1890, s. 16). will not be so attributed if the knowledge of the agent was acquired when he was not acting as such (JVells v. Smith [1914] 3 K. B. 722).]
(vi)
that
it
was
in fact acted in
on by the
plaintiff in
the
manner
which
it
Digitized
by Microsoft
5^o
Jennings v. Broughion (^853) 17 Beav. 334. Smith V. Chadwick (1884) L. R. 9 App. Ca. 187. (There is some little doubt as to how far a jury, or the Court acting as a jury/ may draw inferences on this point.)
(vii)
consequence of acting on
Eastwood V. Bain (1858) 3 H. & N. 738. Barry v. Croskey (1861) 2 J. & H. I (adopted L. R. 14 App. Ca. 337).
it.
in
Derry
v.
Peek (1889)
[The
Olfaction
immaterial;
v.
if
was
a substantial
inducement {Tatton
^ade (1856)
459').]
18 C. B. 371;
Edgington
v.
Motive
immaterial
1029.
It is
show
any
made, or intended
to
make,
profit
by the alleged
false misrepresentation,^*^ or
plaintiff.^''^
that he
(a)
had any
v. Freeman (1789) 3 T. R. 51. Foster V. Charles (1830) 7 Bing. 105. Derry v. Peek (1889) L. R. 14 App. Ca., at p. 365. (b) Polhill V. Walter (1832) 3 B. Ad. 114.
Pasley
&
Peek
V.
Gurney
(1873.)
Mode of representation
1030.
The
representation which
is
the ground of an
action of Deceit
may be made by
;
or other conduct
^^^i
may
be
the
character,
credit,
ability,
or
made
to enable
such
Digitized
by Microsoft
DECEIT
other person to obtain credit, money, or
less
goods,^*")
541
un-
is
made
in writing
("^
Moens
v.
Heyworth (1842) 10 M.
&
W.,
at p. 157, per
Parke, B.
Dunsford (1801) I East, (1831) 8 Bing. 33 Peek v. Gurney (1873) L. at p. 392, per Chelmsford, C.)But no mere omission basis of an action of Deceit (Haycraft v. Creasy (1801)
lent to suggestio falsi {Eyre v.
bett V.
Brown
p.
104, per
Lord Kenyon, C.
J.;
Pickering
v.
Dowson (1813) 4
Arkwright
Newbold (1881)
(b)
The wording
of this clause
in
is
admittedly
(i
obscure.
1
M.
&
interpretations, see
Lyde
v.
Barnard
836)
(The Act does not (c) Statute of Frauds Amendment Act, 1828, s. 6. authorize signature by an agent; and it is on this account that a corporation aggregate cannot be sued on a fdlse representation as to credit (Swift v.
Jewsbury (1874) L. R. 9 Q. B. 301 Hirstv. ff^est Riding Banking Co. [1901] 2 K. B. 560). In Lyde v. Barnard (1836) I M. & W. loi, and Bishop v. Balkis Co. (1890) 25 Q. B. D. 77, 512, the members of the Court differed considerably on the question whether a representation which only indirectly affected the credit of the third party was within the statute.)
;
1031. The
might have
dis- Bona
fides
^ /"'"'""/
making independent
tion of Deceit;
if,
enquiries,
is
no answer
to
an ac-
representation.
Wickham
v.
(1858) 3
De G.
&
J. 304.
Venezuela Co.
v.
Kisch (1867) L. R. 2 H. L. 99 (rescission). Dublin Corporation [1907] A. C. 351 (where even a clause
in
must
and that the defendants should not be responsible ments, was held no bar to the action of Deceit).
Digitized
by Microsoft
S42
Plaintiff
gutlty of
1032.
unlawful act
he did not
know
to
Rhodes [1899]
Q. B. 816.
criminal offence.
see 738.]
Qucere
if
had not actually been convicted of any he had been. As to torts generally,
Fraud of
''^*"'
033.
principal
is
77z;
from
it.
See the cases quoted in "JJz, and add: Swire V. Francis {l%-Jj) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 106. George Whitchurch, Ld. v. Cavanagh [1902] A. C. 117. [In Udall V. Atherton (1861) 7 but there the principal
;
divided
H. & N. 172, the Court was equally had taken advantage of the agent's
it.]
fraud, though
Fraud
ln"/ agent
1034.
principal
is
made by
pressly or
false,
his agent
which he
to
be
or without belief in
truth;
of the representation.
Digitized
by Microsoft
DECEIT
Cornfoot Parke, BB.
V.
543
and
l(contract).
Fowke (1849) 6 M.
& W.
National Exchange Co. v. Drew (1855) 2 Macq., at pp. 145-6, per Lord St. Leonards, C. Ludgater v. Ltrve (1881) 44 L. T. 694 (C. A.).
Fowke, uhi sup., the majority of the Court held where an innocent misrepresentation had been made by the plaintiff's agent, without the knowledge of the plaintiff, the plaintiff was not prevented from enforcing the contract, though, if he had in fact been aware of the misrepresentation, he would have known that it was false. But this case turned largely on the fornji of the pleadings, and the decision has been severely criticized {National Exchange Co. v. Drew, uhi sup., at p. 145; Piarson iff Son v. Dublin Corporation [1907] A. C, at pp. 357-8, pfr Lord Halsbury).]
[In Cornfoot v.
that
who
rriakes,
bona
fide,
it,
Subsequent
^^I'^f'^^^u
making
he
become
liable in an action
whom
the representation
that, to the
knowledge
it
subse-
subsequently discovered
it
by the defendant
is
whom
it
was made.
Newbold (1881)
[Probably, if the defendant can be held to have continued to affirm the statement after he discovered its untruth, e. g. by allowing the plaintiff to enter into a contract with him on the strength of the statement, the rule is the other way (Reynell v. Sprye (1852) i D. M.
&
G. 660; Brownlie
v.
Campbell (1880) L. R.
'5
App. Ca.,
at pp.
951-2)-]
Directors'
''"^''"3'
is
liable to
pay compensation
Digitized
by Microsoft
544
to all persons
tures
on the
was
loss or
sustain
specified in section
who has
named,
person
>;
who
is
in such prospectus, as
who has
sMt;M*
,
.-4'^;
84.
Digitized
by Microsoft
DECEIT
545
in this
the
Work
Part
General
( 728-734 inclusive); and the reader will look in vain for it among the specific torts. This has been deliberately adopted as the only
from being a specific tort, Negligence merely one of the commonest grounds of liability in specific torts. Putting aside the few cases, such as Malicious Prosecution and Deceit, where there is no liability without intentional wrong doing, there is no class of tort which cannot be committed negligently as well as intentionally, e. g. Trespass to the person {Scott y. Shepherd (1777) 2 W. B. 892, 3 Wils. 403; Leame V. Bray (1803) 3 East 593), Libel {Vizetelly v. Mudie [1900] 2 Q. B. 170). Conversely, every act which is a tort if committed negligently, will be equally a tort if committed intentionally. It would seem,
logical
arrangement.
So
far
but
is
among
specific torts,
is
like a classi-
among
such as Sale, Hire, and Insurance. It is true that, in some of the cases, we read of an " action for negligence" (e. g. Radley v. L. N. W. R. (1876) L. R. i App! Ca., at This is due to the fact that, excluding Trespass, and a few p. 759). of the actions (originally Actions on the Case) which received distinctive names, e. g. Libel, Trover, Deceit, &c., no systematic clasThere was sification of torts was attempted by the Common Law. no necessity to specify in pleading whether a special Action on the
for
damage
by the wrong. All fell equally under the heading "Actions on the Case." But when it was recognized that (in the absence of intention) damage to the plaintiff was not a ground of liability, unless there was negligence on the part of the defendant, negligence came to be spoken of as the " gist of the action" (see Stanley v.Powell [1891] i Q. B., at p. 94) and an "action for negligence " became a common type of Action on the Case. The treatment of Negligence as a special kind of tort is therefore survival of a classification of torts based on the forms of action a a classification which has now disappeared in favour of a division based mainly on the nature of the interest affected and negligence has no logical place among torts divided into such classes as Torts
interest affected
;
some other
in
Respect of Property, the Person, the Reputation, and the like. The circumstances in which the Law of Torts imposes a duty
T2
Digitized
by Microsoft
546
will be
if"
found dealt with in the above referred to, and particularly This Part of the work does not deal with Negligence in the performance of contracts or in the administration of trii^its really by far the larger part of the law of Negligence. Still less does it deal with Negligence regarded as an element in criminal liability.
731^
Digitized
by Microsoft
INTERESTS IN LAND
TITLE
1037.
Interests
GENERAL
by English
interests
'" ^"""^
in
land recognized
Law
An
estate in pos[ante,
is
'corporeal hereditament'
Bk.
I,
39)['
were, originally, those interests which i. e. possession of the land as by a free tenant. By virtue of the doctrine of tenure, each of them was deemed to have been originally created by way of a feudal gift (" feoffment ") by a superior (" lord ") to an inferior (" tenant "), to hold upon terms of service. This principle of tenure, which still colours the general character of English Land Law, and is the
'
Corporeal hereditaments
some otherwise inexplicable peculiarities, was, originally, no less a principle of government than of ownership. It was based on the theory that every acre of land in the kingdom was possessed by a tenant who could be held responsible to his lord, and, ultimately, to the Crown, for any services and other liabilities due in
origin of
respect of it. Consequently, a corporeal hereditament could only be conveyed by notorious transfer or taking of seisin ; and the
Digitized
by Microsoft
548
LAW OF PROPERTY
terms " seisin " and " corporeal hereditament " became ultimately, about Littleton's time, co-extensive. Though at first the King's Courts recognized only seisin of a free tenement, i. e. under free tenure, seisin " according to the custom of the manor" came in with the recognition of the interest of the copyholder in the sixteenth century. The term " seisin " was not extended to the estate for years ; because the latter was at first regarded as a merely contractual or chattel interest. But, ultimately, though it is still regarded as a chattel interest, the term " estate," and the general doctrine of tenure, were extended also to the tejm of years, which now ranks as a ' corporeal hereditament,'~though it does not descend to heirs, and, not being a freehold, is not the subject of seisin.]
Estates
1038.
are
:
The
estates
recognized by English
estates tail,
Law
(iii)
(i)
according to the custom of a manor, (" copyholds " ,and " customary
estates
for
estates
held
(vi) estates
at will.
named.W
An
of the tenant
is
greater than
viefi^
(b)
any express authority for this proposition; but statements of real property law. Any attempt to create an estate in defiance of this order would, before 1 845, at least if made by feoffment, have incurred a forfeiture. There was an exception in the case of a tenant-in-tail, e, g. a life or any estate created out of an estate tail was merely defeasible on the death of the creator ; unless made under the provisions of the Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833 {Goodright v. Meade (1765) A lease for longer than a year by a copyholder 3 Burr. 1704). requires, in the absence of special custom, the licence of the lord of the manor {Jactman v. Heddesden (1594) Cro. Eliz. 351.) Slade V. Pattison (1834) j L.J. Ch., at p. 57, /^r Bosanquet, L. C.
implied in
all
Snow
V. Boycott
[1892]
Ch.,
at p.
115.
Digitized
by Microsoft
INTERESTS IN LAND
1039.
. .
549
By
an estate in possession
(i)
is
owner of
Liabilities
of tenant '
must, unless he
a tenant in
{^post.
frankalmoigne
or merely at will
demanded)
[In practice, the oath of fealty is always " respited " ; but, semhle, it is the origin of forfeiture by disclaimer {post, (iii)). The tenant at will is not bound to do fealty (Co. Litt. 63 a) ;
{ibid.,
95 b).]
(ii)
[The
there
(iii)
forfeiture
of
of the disclaimer.)
s.
[The
14, have
(iv)
is
session
Digitized
by Microsoft
55
LAW OF PROPERTY
to grant the interest
Budde (i8zz)
5 B.
& Aid.
[But a tenant
who
may show
No estoppel
where an
interest passes").]
(v)
relief,
on succeeding
equal to the
sum
one
of
a
year'si rent
the case
copyhold tenant,
;
sum
fixed
by the
300)
91
a.
St.
I, c. 4.,
(The
date of
tliis
statute is uncer-
Co.
litt.
[The
liability to
body- captured in
long been
years.]
obsolete.
It
Incidents of
1040.
By
owner of
estate
reversion
an
of which a smaller
may
distrain, in
manner permitted
all
or pro-
Digitized
by Microsoft
INTERESTS IN LAND
55
therefor
(a)
Litt. 8.
W
may
also distrain for a yearly rent,
s.
lessor at will
is
72; Co.
Litt.
57 b).)
(b)
Litt.
127.
[Presumably, the reversioner cannot distrain unless the tenant or has been in possession of the land; e. g. the creator of a life estate in remainder <:ould not distrain until the remainder had taken
is
effect in possession.]
(U)
may
seize,
on the death
of^,
his tenant's
the case
decessor's
may
best
be)
beast
other
chattel
15, 24.
'Major V. ,3randwerd\{i6'i6)'Qro. Car. -260. Austen v. Bennet (1693) i Salic. 356. 'Edwards -v. 'Mosiley (1740) 'Willes, 192. DamerelH. Protherce (1847) 10 Q. B. 20.
Western
v. Bailey
[1896]
Q.
B., at p. 2 J 8.
may be seized or discustomary earn orily be seized (Woodland v: Mantel (1552) Plowd. 94; Odihani v. Smith {isg;^) Cro. Eliz. 589, and Moore, 540 ; Randall v. Scory (1633) Cro. Car. 313.) Seizure may take place anywhere; distress only on the land in respect of which the heriot is due (Justin v. Bennet, ubi sup.
[Heriot-service, at any rate if ancient,
heriot
trained for;
The right to seize heriots v. Bailey [1897] i Q. B. 86). not barred by lapse of time under the Limitation Acts (Lord In the case of Zouchev. Dalbiac (1875) L. R. 10 Exch. 172). years terminable hy lives, a heriot may be reserved on an estate for the dropping of the lives (Williams v. Burrell (1845) i C. B. 402 ; E. of Mount Edgecumhe v. Commrs. of Inland Revenue [191 1] 2 K. B. 24) and in the case of an estate for a fixed term of years,
Western
is
on the death of a tenant or the alienation of the term Packham (1868) L. R. 4 Ch. App. 190).]
{Pickett v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
5S2
(iii)
is
LAW OF PROPERTY
estopped, in like
manner
his
as his tenant,
so
long
is
he
claims
reversionary
estate,
from denying
in legal proceedings
title,
had
some
which he
case
ployed
void by statute.)
[The
Book
Merger
1041.
Whenever an
is
estate in
land
is
vested in
same land, which becomes vested W in the same person in the same right,^'') the smaller
estate
1067) absorbed in the larger (" merger ");W unless it was the intention of the
is
(subject to
them
that
separate
it is
existence should
be maintained, or
unless
whom
If one
is
is
no merger
(5</*'
(b)
ford^s Case (16(59) ^ ^^P- 73 ^)' (In this case some little Jones v. Davies (i86r) 7 H. & N, 507. doubt was expressed by the Court as to whether estates in different rights did not inerge at law, if the merger
by the
acts
of the parties.
s.
ture Act,
1873,
was brought about But, since the passing of the Judica25 (below), this question has had only an
'
<
historical interest.)'
:>
(c)
Re RadcHffe [1892J
Ch. 227.
Digitized
by Microsoft
INTERESTS IN LAND
553
[A longer term may even merge in a shorter ; if the latter is expectant in reversion upon the former, and both become vested in the same person {^Stephens v. Bridges (1821) 6 Madd. 66).]
(d) Judicature Act, 1873,
s.
25 (4).
2
A. G.
V.
Kerr (1840)
lease
lessee
was held to
for (appar-
Vaughan Jenkins [1900] 2 Ch., at p. 370. Capital and Counties Bank v. Rhodes [1903] i Ch. 652. Lea V. Thursby [1904] 2 Ch. 57.
Ingle v.
[The
legal estate
doctrine of merger applies also to (a) coalescence of the and the corresponding equitable interest in the same
land (Re Douglas (1884) 28 Ch. D. 3275 Re Seleus [1901J i Ch, 921), (b) coalescence of a charge and the estate on which it is
charged {Re French-Brewster" s Settlements [1904 J i Ch. 713; Re Hole [1906] 1 Ch. 673; and Re Gibbon [1909] i Ch. 367, Butler V. Rice [19 10] 2 Ch. 277), (c) coalescence of a higher with a lower There is no coalescence obligation {ante, Bk. II, Part I, 345). of a true estate tail or a base fee with the estates immediately expectant thereon {Stafford's Case (1609) 8 Rep., at 75a; Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833, s. 39; Re Dunsany's Settlement [1906] i The extinguishment of satisfied terms under the Ch., at p. 582). Satisfied Terms Act, 1845, is very like merger; but the word is not It was argued in Playford v. Hoare (1829) 3 Y. used in the statute. at p. 180, by Mr. Preston, of counsel for the successful deJ., fendant, that an estate for life executed by the Statute of Uses will Sed quarel\ never merge in a remainder at the common law.
&
1042.
interests
les\
by English
and
(ii)
Law
are
(i)
("hereditaments
purely incorporeal"),
(iii)
equitable in-
terests,
and
(iv)
possession.
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Fee simple
is
II
FREEHOLD
1043.
An
1897,
i) to heirs
collateral, in
Co.
Litt.
I
b.
common
law, the estate was descendible to the By the Inheritance Act, 1833, s. z,
'
December, 1833, de"purchaser" (i. e. the person who last acquired the estate otherwise than by descent) but the Law of Property Amendment Act, 1859, s. '9 make? the statement in the text correct. There is no restriction of remoteness. Such an estate is, obviously, capable of enduring indefinitely. The provisions of the Land Transfer Act, 1897, s. i, have no application
the estate, on intestacy occurring since 31st
first
scends, in the
s.
2 (2).)
Cannot be
created
1044.
No new
can be created
Crown W
;
viz.
except (possibly)
Dy
the
enfranchisement
of a copyhold
{posi^
(ii)
tail,
or by the
[post,
1057,
io65).W
(iii)
by the enlargement of
a long
term under
Digitized
by Microsoft
555
88 1
I, c.
{post, iiS5).(^)
I
(a)
18
Edw,
its
ancient date
and
sequences
(b) It
is,
at
of course, possible
is
operations,
no new
fee simple,
is
created;
and
merely transferred.
which can hardly have been intended. And, moreover, the doctrine of the text is supported by judicial authority {Lord Lilford V. A. G. (1867) L. R. z H. L., at p. 70, per Lord Chelmsford, C, ; Re Trevaaia/i [1910] z Ch. 538).
1045.
An
estate
in
fee
simple
is
transferred to Words of
""*'"*""'
an individual or individuals, in an assurance by deed, by the use of the words " and his heirs " after the
name of
heirs of a
named perSon,W
of deeds
In a testamentestator's
of form, to do so
real estate
where there
is
a devise of
without words of
limitation,,
Such devise
whole
estate or interest
which the
in
testator
had power
to dispose of
by testament
such real
estate, unless
by the testament. W
(b)
(c)
s.
51.
(The
alternative
expression
is
Digitized
by Microsoft
SS6
;
,
LAW OF PROPERTY
{Ethel's
'
,a4.
Contract .[igoi"]
Ch.
'
\ (d) Mannex y. Greener (iSyz) L. R. 14 Eq.^56. Crumpe V. Crumpe [1900] A. C. 127. (e)"' Wills' Act, 1837,8. 2?. (The statute only applies
'
945)-)
"
to wills exe-
'
December, 1837.
In
was necessary,
simple, to
devise his
iise some expression showing the testator's intention to whole estate (Gatenby v. Morgan\\%^(>) 1 Q. B. D
'
68s).)
,:
Gimtor^'
corporation
1046.
in an assurance
.
by deed
a
to
cor-
fee
simple. W
suniption
an individu,alj
(a)
!)
:
io45).('')
Co. Litt. 8 b, 94b; E. p. Vicar of Castle Bytham [1895] I Ch. (But it is said that a gift "in frankalmoigne," or "in free 348. alms," to a religious corporation sole, passes a fee simple without It is the better opinion, that s. 51 of the word "successors." the Conveyancing Act, 1 881, has no application to conveyances
to corporations.)
(b)
of the section are "devised of "person " in the Act. (See Interpretation Act, 1889, s. 19, which, however, does not apply to the Wills Act, 1837.)
8.
;
z8.
The words
is
and there
no
definition
[Of course,
all
assurances of land to corporations are subject to But this does not prevent the property
Digitized
by Microsoft
557
sell
Where one
person contracts to
is,
land
Contract
^"'^'
bound
convey an
{AnU, Bk.
II, Pt. I,
,,.^,,...,
421(b).)
Hughes
V.
Kitchen v.
J*
i'');'i
.:
ni ^iiifi
:
lot
-,
;';;:,-fi j-flt;
1048.
person
who
is
in possession of land
is
Presumption
presumed, unless the contrary appears,' to be spised f'""" in fee simple of the land. ilqni,,
Wallwyn v. Lee (1803) 9 Ves., at p. 31, per Peaceable y. Watson (1811) 4 Taunt. 16. Doe V. Penfold (1838) 8 C. & P. 536.
'
Lqrd Eldon, C.
'
ju; 3}
"Hi
.
Busher v. Thompson (1846) 4 C. B., at 'p. 59, per Colt^ian, J. Asher v. Whitlock (1865) L. R. i Q. B., at p. 6, per Mellor,
. . >
,. '
'
,
J.'
I
>
'
'
1049.
Subject to his
liabilities
Rights of
and
fge
^simple
and to any
liabilities
by covenant or agreement
title,
at
law or in equity
any franchises,
possession
{pQst, Sect.
Tit.
II),
and
Tit.
to
easements,
or profits
{post.
tenant
in
fee
simple in
entitled
to
in
in fee
Digitized
by Microsoft
558
over
LAW OF PROPERTY
may be
restrained
'LI,
Tit. III).
v. Wright' {i%(io) 2
(1863)
De G. F. & De G. J. & S.
J.
34.5.
(Here the
restriction
was by the
settlor.)
s. 25 (3) has no application to tenPresumably, therefore, the Gguct cannot award damages for equitable waste against such persons} except as a discretionary alternative under the Chancery Amendment Act, 1858, s. 2.]
[The
ants in fee.
Alienation of
1050.
simple
it
Subject
to,
tfbe
law relating to
trusts
knd
fee simp
may
may
create out of
;
any smaller
except
Gustom of
W Any
fee
an
estate in
period or
indefiniteiy,<'*) is void;^'')
may
{semble)
be made
class.^*^)
members of
a limited
I (1290) c. I {Quia Emptores). The secoMd power is consequence of the general principle of tenure {ante, 1037, n.) It is difficult to find any express authority for it ; but it is the basis of ordinary practice. (b) Ifewman y. Newman, {i-jSo) 2 Wils. 125. R. V. Hornchurch (1818) 2 B. & Aid. 189. Rayer v. Strickland (1842) 2 Q. B. 79-2. (c) Re Uacbtt\\%%z) 21 Ch. D. 858. (d) Re 'Rosher (1884) 26 Ch. D. 801.
i8^dw.
a
Digitized
by Microsoft
559
360.
(f)
Re Dugdale (1888) 38 Ch. D. 176. Carbett v. Corbett (1888) 13 P. D. 136; 14 P. D. 7. Re Mackay (1875) L. R. 20 Eq. 186. (But this decision was siverely criticised by Pearson, J., in Re Rosher, ubi sup.)
Re
,
[It is a little doubtful whether the rule laid down by this might not be evaded by a skilful use of a conditional limitation, e. g. " to
and
See
expressions of Chitty, J., in Re Machu, ubi sup., at. p. 842, and of Kay, J., in Re Dugdale, ubi sup., at p. 181. An equitable fee simple so limited has, in fact, been recognised, though without serious discussion {Re Leach [1912] 2 Gh. 422).]
1051.
Any
Attempted
I'^H"'""
it
in his
void.
Vaux
(1746) 8 D. M.
Gulliver v.
&
G. 167, n.
Holmes v. Godson (1856), ibid. Re Dixon [1903] 2 Ch. 458. Re Hanbury [1904] I Ch. 415. Re Crutchley [1912] 2 Ch. 335.
152.
in
effect,
1052.
fee simple
restricting
may be made
its
determinable
Determi"''ipi{"
by any words
period vrhich
duration to an uncertain
may come
to an
of the heirs
is
whom
limited.
The owner of a
rights as the
same
owner of an ordinary
simple
Digitized
by Microsoft
S6o
LAW OF PROPERTY
;
was
(a)
limited.^')
Case of J.
Poole
S. (1585) i Leon. 33. x.Nedham (1608) Yelv. 149.
Edward
Ayres
(b)
V.
Lilford's Case
(1614)
11 Rep.
49
a.
Falkland (16^1') L. Raympnd, 326, /^r Curiam. Bagshaw v. Spencer (1748) i Ves. Sen. 142. Mary Portington's Case (16 13) 10 Rep. 42 a.
last is
[This
fe.e
simple de-
terminable and a fee simple absolute to which a condition subsequent is annexed. The latter estate is not determined until the
breach of condition
and this point may be important For the apby lapse of time. propriate words for each kind of limitation, see" Coke's remarks in the decision last quoted ; but see also the remarks of Lord Hardis
enforced
wicke, in Shields
v.
^tiins (1747)
3 Atk.,
at p.
563.
There
is
terminable fees simple which are the subject of this ; but the expression would seem to be conveniently applicable to all fees descendible to heirs general which are liable to expire by the hap-
pening of any external contingency. The most common example of such fees is that conveyed by the limitation contained in a strict settlement to the settlor and his heirs until the celebration of the intended marriage.]
Intermittent
1053.
fee simple
i.
cannot be
e.
limited
it
to
take
fee
smp
gffgct intermittently,
to revive after
has once
27
a,
Corbet's Case
17
a.
[The well-known exception of the Duchy of Cornwall under the express provisions of an Act of Parliament.]
is
limiteJ
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
1054.
ible
III
ESTATES
owner
TAIL
is
An
estate tail is
its
an estate which
descend-
Estate tail
to all the lineal issue of the original donee, or of a person who was his
lineal ancestor, in
tail
on the death of
(" estate
general"),
or,
due order,
a
issue
of such
person by
particular
husband or
class
wife or by a
or
description
special"), or
lineal
tail
to
and
male") "general"
13 Edw. I (1285) c. I {De Donis Co. Litt. 9 1 et seq. Page V. Hayviard (1704) 2 Salk. 570.
Re Mountgarrett [1919]
[In the case of a
gift to
2 Ch. 294.
the heirs of the body of a named person, interest, the estate will be inheritable
all the issue, answering the description, of the named person, not merely by the issue of the first taker (Inheritance Act, 1833,
4).]
1055.
tation, in
An
is
created by a limi-
General and
'^^""
an assurance by deed,
to the
or,
executed after 31st December, 1881, to the donee " in tail." W An estate tail special is created in an
assurance by deed by a limitation to the donee " and
Digitized
by Microsoft
562
LAW OF PROPERTY
the heirs of his (her) body by his (her) wife (husband) " (naming or describing, such wife or husband).^"^
An
estate in tail
is
created by a
"and
or, in
the heirs
male
(or female)
the case
of deeds executed after 31st December, 1881, to the donee "in tail male" (or " female ").W Any of such kinds of estate
in any
tail
may be
created by a devise
testator's intention, to
(a)
In Littleton's day,
or
it was necessary to add the word " begotten,"' some equivalent; but by Coke's time, the word had become' There seems to have been a unnecessary (Co. Litt. 20 b). good deal of uncertainty at one time about the orthodox " words of procreation." (See Butler's & Hargrave's notes to same
passage.)
s,
51.
Co.
Litt.
20
b.
(d)
(e)
Ibid.
24 a.
(f)
Conveyancing Act, 1881, s. Ji. (There appears to be no statutory form of creating an estate tail special.) Lord Ossulston's Case (1708) 3 Salk. 336 ("heirs males "). Fernony. Wright (1858) 7 H. L. C. 35. Mannox v. Greener (1872) L. R, 14 Eq. 456. Petham-Clittton v. D. of Newcastle [1902] i Ch. 34.
[A grant to a corporation sole and the heirs of its body would probably be held evidence of an intention to grant an estate tail to
the donee in his
estate
individual capacity, at
least
so
far
as the legal
it must be by the well-known resolution in WiWs Case (1599) ^ Rep. 16 b, a devise to a man and his "children" or " issue " does not confer on the first taker an estate tail if either
On
that,
(a)
there
is
evidence in the will that the testator intended the way of remainder or executory limita-
{Re 'Jones [1910] i Ch. 167)^ or (b) the devise is capable, by reason of the fact that children or issue of the first taker were living
of
the' devise,
at the date
V.
of being, held to pass a joint estate {Byng old law, the joint devi-
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES TAIL
563
sees in this case usually took only life estates. ' Now, under s. 28 of the Wills Act, 1837, they will, usually, take the whole interest of the testator.]
1056.
The
tenant in
tail
in
Rights of
tenant in
tail
same rights
to possession
the
tenant in fee simple {ante, 1049); W except that a tenant in tail special whose spouse is dead leaving no surviving issue inheritable under the entail ("tenantin-tail
after
possibility
of issue extinct")
may be
restrained
(a)
from committing
2243.
Partington's Case
equitable wraste.W
Co.
Lite.
(b)
(1614) 10 Rep., at 39 a. Savily. Savil {17 ij) 11 Vin. Ab. 154. Turner v. Wright (i860) 2 De G. F. & J., at ,p. 247, per Lord Campbell, C. Before the Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25 (3), a tenant in tail after possibility could not be sued in tort for waste Quare : since (^Williams v. Williams (18 to) 12 East, 209.
the Act).
Mary
1057.
An
estate tail
Barring
'"'"'^
of the
parties/^)
after possibility
of
tail
whose
estate tail
for services
is
may
tail
into a fee
the
High
Court, in
Digitized
by Microsoft
564
LAW OF PROPERTY
and a tenant in
as aforesaid)
tail
such tenant
Any condition,
covenant, proviso, or limitation forbidding such conversion, or providing for the cesser or forfeiture of an
estate tail
(a)
is void.(s)
Stone v.
at p.
(b)
(c)
18.
34 and 35 Hen. VIII (1542) c. 20, ss. i, 2. Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833, s. 18 ; A.-G. v. D. of Richmond [1907]- 2 K. B. 940.
Ibid.
Ibid.
s.
s.
(d)
(e)
3.
34.
1
(f)
Ibid. ss.
5 and' 21.
(For definition of protector, see post, 1059.) (The consent may be given by a deed which
it
;
if
it
is
(g)
remaindermen to be barred (^Re Wilmer' s Trusts [1910] 2 Ch. III).) Corbet's Cast (1600) 1 Rep. 84. Mildmay' s ,Case (1606) 6 Rep. 40 a. Mary Partington's Case (1614) 10 Rep. 35 a. Dawkins v. Lord Penrhyn (1878) L. R. 4 App. Ca., at p. 6\,per Lord Penzance.
tended the
Base fee
1058.
disentailing assurance
executed, under
the provisions of the Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833, by a tenant in tail not in possession, and not entitled
to the remainder or
reversion
tail,
in
fee immediately
executed. W
Such base
of the
on the
failure
unless in the
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES TAIL
meantime
it
565
fee
simple
Re-
133
[post,
065
).('')
Edward Seymor's Case (161 2) 10 Rep. 98 a. Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833, ss. 22 and 34. (b) Ibid. s. 19.
is,
[The
that
it
lasts so
Thus, if of the person creating it would have lasted. there is a limitation in remainder to A and the heirs male of his body, and B, who has inherited the estate as A's eldest son, conveys, without the consent of the protector, to C and his heirs by enrolled conveyance under the Act, C's estate, unless enlarged, A base ceases with the failure of A's issue male through males. fee is a fee simple determinable (^Edward Seymor^s Case, ubi sup.).']
estate tail
1059.
The
Protector of
purposes of 1058, means either (i) the person or persons appointed (not exceeding three in number
^'" '"'^"
aliens ( 73))
by the
settlor to act as
failing such
by the
settlor as shall
(iii)
die
by deed relinquish
office,^ or
failing
any greater
estate,
rent),W notwithstanding
any such
bered such
estate.
Digitized
by Microsoft
566
(a)
LAW OF PROPERTY
Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833, s. 32. (The deed of relinquishment must be enrolled as a disentailing Ibid.
assurance.)
Ibid.
(b)
(c)
s.
25.
(^h.
D. 6z8.
26.
s.
[It appears to be clear, from the provisions of s. 32, that, upon an estate tail coming into possession, the powers oi any specially appointed protector cease as regards such estate ; though they may continue as to subsequent estates tail.]
Estates not
1060.
No
'protect7r%ip
administrator, or assign
becomes protector of
a settle-
ment by
virtue of
any
estate
27.
[Trustees directed to accumulate rents until a tenant in tail ' protectors ' of such estate tail ; and. such tenant in tail can create a fee simple by enrolled deed without their consent [Re Trevanion [1910] 2 Ch. 538).]
reaches a given age are not
Supple-
mentary
protectors
excluded under 1060 from being protector of the settlement, the owner
1061.
When
any person
is
1059 will be protector of the settlementlW If the protector is of unsound mind (whether so found
not), the
by inquisition or
by the King's sign manual with the custody of the persons and estates of persons of unsound mind, is
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES TAIL
protector of the settlement.^
If the
567
protector
is
nominated by the
infant, or if it
is
is
an
uncertain whether he
is
alive or
who would
otherwise be en-
by virtue of
his estate to
excluded by the
in
settlor,
his stead, or
if for
is
the
is
s.
28.
(b)
(c)
33. Lunacy Act, 1890, s. 108. The case of the convict, though stated,
is, by a slip of the draftsman, not provided for by the section (33). The omission must be rectified by implication (^Re Wainewrigbt (1843) i Phill.
258).
(d)
s.
33.
1062.
The
tail,
Discretion
or withholding his
'fP'""^'""'
tenant in
tion,
acts
as
and not
Any
device, shift, or
contrivance, by
which
whether
imposed by the
tector himself,
is
by the pro-
void.
ss.
36, 37.
Digitized
by Microsoft
S68
Joint
protectors
LAW OF PROPERTY
Where two
or
1063.
more persons
estate
of undivided shares in an
in 1059, each of
them
as
is
Where
settlor as
two
or
more persons
are appointed
by the
tail
in re-
entail
in so far as
no
substitute
been appointed. W
(b)
Cohen
y.
Mode of
consent
1064.
The
settle-
by the tenant in tail is effected, or by a separate deed executed on or before the day on ^hich such disposition is made,
disposition
by the same
and enrolled
position
is
at or
when
such
dis-
enrolled. W
No
s.
42, 46.
Whitmore-Seark [1907] z Ch. 332. (b) Fines -and Recoveries Act, 1833, s. 44.
Whitmore-Searle
V.
[Inasmuch as the protector's consent must be given either by a deed executed before or on the same day as the disposition by the tenant in tail, or by joining in such disposition itself, it follows that, if it was not given before the tenant in tail's death, it can only be given by executing such disposition. {Whitmore-Searle v. WhitmoreSearle, ubi sup.) It may be effectually given by an (enrolled)
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES TAIL
the deed
569
deed which does not, in form, profess to give it ; if it is clear from that the protector intended the remaindermen to be barred (Re Wilmer's Trusts [1910] 2 Ch. m).]
1065.
base fee
is
Enlargement
of base fee
whom
is
vested
Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833,
(ii)
s.
39.
been tenant in
such base fee
tail
of the land, of a
dis-
position, in favour
is
of the person in
whom
vested,
which
disposition
in such land
19.
of course, require the consent of the But if, after an assurance of a base fee by a trustee in bankruptcy, there ceases to be a protector of the settlement, the base fee automatically enlarges into a fee simple
will,
[Such a disposition
protector, if any
{ibid, s.
35).
absolute
{ibid. s.
60) .J
(iii)
fee
was crea
ated, or
for
twelve
Digitized
by Microsoft
S70
LAW OF PROPERTY
years next after the creator of such base
fee
entail
without
6.
Covenant
to settle
1066.
covenant to
property
tail
comes vested
Re
in
him, or to grant a
but of
//;7^^rj
it.
578 (approving-
v.
No
merger
1067.
will
(a)
Neither an
in
estate
tail,W
nor a base
fee/*")
merge
any subsequent
estate.
Stafford's Case (1609) 8 Rep., at p. 75 a. Re Dunsany^s Settlement, ubi sup., at p. 582, per
Romer, L.
J.
(b)
1833,
s.
39.
(A
merge
it
enlarges.)
Imperfect
alienation
1068.
An
tail
and Recoveries Act, 1833, confers upon the transferee only a descendible fee, determinable, on the
death of the assuror, by the heir in
estate as
is
tail,
or such
less
transferred.
lutely
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES TAIL
571
execute a disentailing assurance will be specifically enforced against the issue in tail or the remainderman.^
(a)
Stone v.
Newman
Machils. Clark (1702) 2 Salk. 619 (overruling Tiai v. Glascock (1669) I Wms. Saund. 250). Miles V. Capel (187 s) L. R. 20 Eq. 692. Hankey v. Martin (1^83) 49 L. T. 560 (where the estate is described, by Kay, J., as a "base fee").
V,
[Whether the heir's right is a right ofentry or a right of action? Doe Rivers (1797) 7 T. R. 276; Doe\. fVhichelo (1799) 8 T. R. 211.]
(b)
Campbell
V.
Sandys (1803)
Sch.
&
Lef., at p.
Redesdale.
(c)
(This section does not 1833, s. 47. prevent the contract being enforced against the tenant in tail himself during his lifetime {Bankes v. Small (1887) 36 Ch. D. 716). It is generally assumed that estates tail do not pass to the personal representatives of a deceased owner under s. i of the Land Transfer Act, 1897.)
1069.
When
tenant
in
tail
has
created,
in
Confirmation
made an
assurance
the Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833, of any estate in the same land, such subsequent assurance, whatever
its
have the
effect
es-
tate, to
the extent to
it
in tail could
have confirmed
Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833, s. 38. Crocker v. Waine (1854) 5 B. & S. 697.
Hankey
v.
[By
"voidable estate," the Act presumably means an estate tail or the remainderman or reversioner.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
1070.
the
life
An
is
case
it is
called an estate
Co.
pur autre
Litt.
vie.
41
b;
Creation
1071.
ited in a
An
of the tenant
is
lim-
show an
pur
An
estate
of another person or
persons,
life
or by a limitation
estate other
made by
a tenant for
of any
a limitation
any
a term of years.
created or transferred
inferred.
Digitized
by Microsoft
573
had no other
interest in the
land devised.
(aj
Co.
Litt.
42
V.
a.
Wright
Dotaley (1773) 2
W.
Bl. 11 85.
Kuselv. Watson (1879) Ch. D. 129. Zimbler v. Abrahams [1903] I K. B. 577. Austin V. Newham [1906] 2 K. B. 167. (b) Brudnel's Case (1592) J Co. 9. (c) Boddington v. Robinson (1875) L. R. 10 Exch. 270. (d) Meredith v. jfoans (1632) Cro. Car. 244. Hunter' s anfl Hewlett' s Contract [1907] i Ch. 46.
[Brudnel's Case
is
the lives of
B and C will continue until the death B and C {Day v. Day (1854) Kay, at p. ,709).]
(e)
s.
28.
i
Quarm
v.
Quarm [1892]
Q. B. 184.
[Various anomalous forms of estates for life may be imagined, during the lives of A, B, and C and the surfor life if B shall so long live, vivor (Co. Litt. 41 b), an estate to
e.g. an estate to
&c.
1072.
corporation
may
(subject to the
Mortestate
life
Life estate in
Charitable
vie; but
Uses Acts)
hold
its
an
""P"^'"''"
own
1045).
vie.
Semble, a corporation
cannot be
Edw. IV
(1482) Hil.
pi. 9.
1073.
Rights of
*i^^"'^'"'
mortgages, the
tenant for
is
life
in
possession
(not
being a mortgagee)
entitled,
Digitized
by Microsoft
574
position
LAW OF PROPERTY
made by
hiiiiself or his predecessors in title,
and
to
any
liabilities
and
binding on
Tit. II),
him
IX)
at
law or in equity
land,
profits
[post. Tit.
to
possession of
C")
deeds thereof,
and to the
(b)
Tewart v. Laioson (1874) L- R- 18 Eq. 490. Garner v. Hannyngton (1836) 2Z Beav. 627. Allwoody. Heywood (1863) i H. & C. 745. Leathesv. Leathes (1877) 5 C^- ^- 221.
[If there are special circumstances, e. g. if the tenant for life is not a safe custodian, or the deeds are required to enable the Court to administer the property, the Court may deprive the tenant for life of the title deeds (^Leathes v. Leathes, ubi sup.).'^
(c)
Re Kemeys-Tynte [1892]
Finer
v.
(d)
p.
M.
R.
Honywood
31
1.
Estovers
1074.
tenant for
life is entitled,
lavnr
notwithstand-r
and take reasonably from the land sufficient timber for repair and fuel of his house standing thereon
(" housebote "),
for
making and
repairing
instru-
ments of husbandry to be used thereon (" ploughbote"), and for repairing (ancient) hedges (i. e.
fences) thereon
("haybote")
unless
he
is
restrained
Digitized
by Microsoft
575
41
b.
[The
1075.
tenant for
life
whose
own
is
act or default)
between
entitled, notwithstanding
him
in the
land ("emblements").
life
may
55 b.'
[Can the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1851,5. i,(j>ost, 1141) ever As a rule, the apply tp a clainn of a tenant for life to emblements ? claim of emyements is confined strictly to annual crops (^Graves v. Weld (1833) 5 B. A.d. 105). But it is extended to hops, on account of the great labour involved in the cultivation of them (Latham v. Atwqod (1635) Cro. Car. 515)! Sembte : ttie right is unaffected by the provisions of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1908,
&
(s.46).]
1076.
tenant for
life,
is
not expressly
liable
,;ina,de
un^
Waste iy
"'^
to
an action for
aji
(*
'i^""
in-
vol-
untary ") waste [post. Sect. II, Tit. Ill) on the land.W Even if he is not impeachable, for waste, he will, be
similarly liable if he
is
Digitized
by Microsoft
576
LAW OF PROPERTY
by implication authorizes him to
commit
sive
equitable wa^te^W
tenant for
life is not,
in the absence
waste
*
'
(a)
'
''i'
^
,
''^
ii.'r
C')
Litt. 53 a. WoodhoUse-y. Walker (1880) 5 Q. B. D. 4041 f^ine V. Lord Barnard (1J16) z Vera. jjS.
s. 25 (3). Cartwright (1889) 41 Ch. D. 53a,
^afil
Action for
'
1077.
The
waste
at
the;
the
may
bring
action
Walker, ubi
WoodhoAst
old Action of
V.
[The
it
Waste was
very technical
its
on
this point
but
formal abolition in 1833 (Real Property Limitation Act, 1833, s. 36) by the Action of Case. The owner of the next vested estate of inheritance may also bring an Action of Trover to recover articles severed from the land, or an action for money had and received from the sale therieof {Seagram
y.
was
at p.
to be
some
also
for life
or years,
may
2
bring
an
{Greene
v.
Cole
(1670)
Wms.
for life
Sand. 252 n.). For ithe case of collusion between a tenant and a remainderti;an in fee, see Birch-JVolfe v. Birch (1870)
''
Ameliorating
1078-
No
equitable
remedy
waste
an action of waste,
the Court
Digitized
by Microsoft
577
life
Meux
[The
last
V. Cobley
two cases were terms of years; but the argument would be stronger for life tenants. In Edmund -v. Martell (1908) XXIV T. L. R. 25, the Court even refused to give the plaintiff judgment for nominal damages in such a case. But the point was
not seriously argued.]
Forfeiture
upon
;
/f///^^^
at securing
objects
deemed
to be contrary to the
own
with a provision
bankruptcy,
is
on
his
own
life,
bankcuptcy.W
Re
Blackman
Re
(b)
Bedson's trust: (1884) 25 Ch. D. 458 (personalty). v. Fysb [1892] 3 Ch. 209. Cotgrave [1903] 2 Ch. 765 (personalty).
For
list of such objects, see ante, Bk. I; 96 ; and add, (n) preventing the tenant entering the military service of the Crown
(c)
{Re Beard [ii)o%] i Ch. 383). Re Johnson Johnson [1904] I K. B. 134. Re Burroughs-Fowler [1916] 2 Ch. 251.
1080.
Alienation
j..
pur autre
vie)
may
alien- /^
V2
Digitized
by Microsoft
578
LAW OF PROPERTY
may
create a quasi fee sim)
or a quasi entail (I 1083). He may also create out of it any estate for years/'') or, if the sub-
ment
any
,
and
services, for
estate justified
Litt.
^ (a) ;Co.
(b)
42
a.
.'.
Of course
of the
such estate, unless made under an overriding power (e. g. under the Settled Land Acts), will come to an en4 with the expiry
lessor's estate.
But a
;
by
a freeholder never
seisin.
occasioned a forfeiture
(c)
because
Co.
Litt.
58 b
'/ni
"o
V'i-iJ'nfjFov
)ti';'i3iiii
noqic
Quasi fee
simple
1081.
A
a
is
ereatefd
by
a limitation
of land in
during the
heirs, to
hold
toi^a
life
of another, or by a limitation
whose
^
interest in
.
is
^uiji;),
-
i^
rtoqu joft
Co.
Litt. 4*1 b.
jH? n6c{u
s^'
[A conveyance
special
to give the executor a right as {Northen v. Carnegie (1859) 4 Drew^. 58^). Quare : since the Land cTransfer Act, 1897. A limitation of a term of years, or of pure personalty, to a personi and. his: heirs, will confer upon such person all the interest of the donor in such property absolutely {Saltern v. Saltern
Alienation
1082.
may be
disposed of by
of quasi fee
simple
vivos or by testament in
the
Digitized
by Microsoft
579
life
it
;
as
but, if
undisposed of by
him
at his death,
will
go to
In
all
other respects,
Co.
Litt.
41 b
\
a f
Edward
/ ^'".'"'
,
\ ^""">-
in
[He cannot destroy an executory interest limited to take effect defeasance of the quasi fee {^Re Barber (1881) 18 Ch. D. 624).]
(b)
s.
the limitation is to A " his heirs executors (and adminA's heir and not his personal representative, will (subject to the Land Transfer Act, 1897, s. i) be entitled as special occupant on A's death intestate {^Atkinson v. Baker (1791) 4 T. R. But (semble) where a quasi fee simple is devised without 229). express words of limitation, the devisee's heir cannot claim as special occupant (^Re Inman [1903] i Ch. 241).]
[Even
istrators),"
(c)
Co.
Litt.
41
b.
1083-
quasi entail
is
created by a limitation of
Quasi entail
by a similar
a life estate
a donor
whose
interest
in the land
is
only.W
Any
than the devisee, and any devise made by a person having an estate pur autre vie, from w^hich an intention to create an' estate
tail
have
similar
efFect.^*")
Digitized
by Microsoft
58o
LAW OF PROPERTY
estate for years or
an
the
donee
Blake v. Luxton (179s) 6 T. R. 289. Campbell y. Sandys (1803) i Sch. & Lef. 281, -^Slade V. Pattison (1834) S L. J. Ch. 51. Conveyancing Act, 1881, s. 51. (b), Wast/ieys v. Chafpell (1714) 3 Bro. P. C. 50. Murthwaite v. Jenkinson (1824) 2 B. & C. 357.
(a)
(c)
P.
3 P.
Wms. Wms.
132. 262.
Ready.
Murthwaite v. Jenkinson (1824) 2 B. & C. 357. boncaster v. Doncaster (1856) 3 K. &J. 26.
from a note in 3 B. & C. 191, that the Lord Chan(Lord Eldon), by whom Murthwaite v. Jenkinson had been referred to the King's Bench, took the view that the gift of the perThat was also the view sonalty in that case was for life only. taken in the two previous cases, on the wording of the limitations;
[It appears
cellor
Barring of
quast entati
1084.
ggggJQjj
jjj^y
own
interest,
tail
but
and the
remaindermen expectant on the failure of such issue, by ordinary conveyance inter vivos. A tenant in
^'''^
quasi
tail
convey
tenant
own
(a)
interest
and that of
his issue.W
No
interest. W
v. Freeker (1737) 1 Atk. ^ (overruiingLoa/v.^arr (1734) 523 ' 262, on that 3 P. Wms. Blake y. Luxton{ij^<i) 6 T. R.
'
289
point).
Digitized
by Microsoft
581
a person destroy an executory interest limited of his estate ? The tenant of a quasi fee cannot {Re Barber (1881) 18 Ch. D. 624).]
in defeasance
(b)
(c)
Campbell
Sandys (1803)
Sch.
&
Lef., at p.
Redesdale.
3 Jur.
N,
S., at p.
408.
1085.
tenant in quasi
tail has,
with regard to
Rights of
'^"''".'
quasi entatl
or, if there
is
no such instrument, or
1073-1078).
this
life
life
{ante,
but
fer
it
is
1086.
When
an estate
_
is
Determi"^^^^
estate
'
minable
life estate.
W A
ment
such
[ante,
1052)
is
as to
show an
tor, that
Digitized
by Microsoft
582
LAW OF PROPERTY
\(
at the
time
when
deemed
terminable
(a)
life estate/'')
Co.
Litt.
42
a,
by
(b)
a limitation to a
estate
is
created
Wills. Act,
1837,
28.
Absence, of
ces
1087.
j^j^jjjjjj^g
If,
que
me
j^j^^j
jjjg
pur autre
vie,
presumed
I.
to be
dead.
18
&
19 Car. II (1666)
c.
II,
s.
Produethnof
cestutquevte
1088.
Any
^^^^
proof of such
to believe
being
other
in question;
Digitized
by Microsoft
583
can
satisfy
in fact alive.
Que Vie Act, 1707,
ss. 1-4. 10 Ch. D. 166.
Cestui
In re
Owen (1878)
U3
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
1089.
Copyhold
^'*''*"
an estate granted by
the will of the lord
the lord of a
manor
to
be held
at
57
b.
[The term " copyhold " is derived from the fact that all changes in the tenancy of copyhold estates are entered on the manorial rolls, and that copies of such entries are treated as evidences of title {Cawthorn v. Mee (1833) 4 B. & Ad. 617). There is much dispute as to the legal definition of a manor ; but, substantially, it may be said to be a feudal unit consisting both of demesne and tenemental lands, and including the right to hold
a court for the lord's tenants.
manor can
it is
exist
without at
least
v.
There is a tradition that no true two freehold tenants to constitute Lawson (1791) 4 T. R. 443); but
well as for other purposes, the unit may continue to exist as a " reputed manor," notwithstanding the absence of freehold tenants
{Soane v. Ireland (1808) 10 East, 259; Clayton v. Williams (1843) W., at p. 807, per Abinger, C. B.). 11 M. The question of
&
the existence of a
V.
manor
is
(1847) ^ Q- ^' ^"iS'i Delacherois v. Delacherois (1864) II H. L. C, at p. 99). Difficulties have sometimes been caused by the existence in a manor of tenants described as holding " according to the custom of the manor," but not " at the will of the lord." But it is now definitely decided (5. of Winchester v. Knight (1717) I P. Wms. 406; D. of Portland v. Hill (^\%66) L. R. 1 Eq. 765) that such tenants, if they hold by copy of court roll, are only privileged copyholders, and not freeholders, i. e. the freehold is in the lord. See, however, the expressions of Willes, J., in Lingnvood v. Gyde (1866) L. R. 2 C. P. 72, decided in the same
Chrismas
year as
D, of Portland
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
1090.
58s
estate in possesCreation of
"j'/Jlff
The
beneficial
as
owner of an
interest,
is
sion in the
manor
manor
estates.
Co. Cop.
34.
Kay (1599) Cro. Eliz. 661. Rayer v. Strickland (1842) z Q. B. 792. Dean of Christchurch y. D. of Buckingham {1^6/^) 17 C.
Gay
V.
B.
N.
S,
391-
[The lord of a manor may appoint a steward for Dowries (1825) 3 B. C. 616).]
life
{Bartlett v.
&
(b)
(c)
Dean of Christchurch v. D, of Buckingham, uhi sup. Griggs y. Gibson (1866) 14 W. R. 819 (even though there trust for accumulation during the infancy of such person) Firebrass v. Pennant (1764) 2 Wils. 254. Quare : since Married Women's Property Act, 1882?
is
ttie
[Where the acts of the lord are merely ministerial, e.g. the admittance of a new tenant on a surrender in his favour by the former tenant, it would seem that they would be valid, even though the lord's title was bad ; if he was de facto in enjoyment of the manor (Clarke v. Pennifather (1584) -4 Rep. 23 b; Burgess v. Thompson (1836) 5 A. E. 532). Otherwise, where the acts involve the exercise of discretion, e. g. the grant of a licence to demise {Petty v. Evans (1610) 2 Brownl. 40); unless done under statutory provisions (e.g. Copyhold Act, 1894, s. 94). A similar rule applies to a steward de facto {Harris v. fays (1599) Cro. Eliz. Where the lord is under personal incapacity, his powers are 699). exercised by his guardian, committee, &c. {Shoplane v, Roydler (1605)
&
Cro. Jac. 98
sup.).']
1091.
The
may be
Extent of
"P^^'^'^
the land in
Digitized
by Microsoft
586
respect of
liabilities
LAW OF PROPERTY
which
it
may be
depend
are
determined
by the
Clarke v. Pennifather (1584) 4 Rep. 23 b. Everest v. Glyn (181 5) 6 Taunt., at 430, per Gibbs, C. Hardcastle v. Dennhon (1861) 4 L. T. 707.
J.
[Of course the copyholder, though nominally holding at the will of his lord, has long been protected against arbitrary ejectment by
the latter (see />w(, 1094, n.).]
except that
(i)
unreasonable, can be
Co. Cop.
s.
33.
Parkers, Co mblefor d {I'^gg) Cro. Eliz. 725. Broadbent V. Wilh (1742) Wils. 360. Fawcet v. Lowther (1751) z Ves. Sen., at p. 302, per Lord Hardwicke, C.
Parkin Badger
Stevens v. Tyrell (1753) z Wils. i. Y. Raddiffe {i7()?>) i Bos. & P. 282. v. Ford (1819) 3 B. & Aid. 153. Hi/tony. E. Granville (1844) 5 Q. B. 701.
M.
of Salisbury v.
Gladstone
(i86i) 9 H. L.
C,
at
p.
701, per
Lord Cranvvorth, C.
(ii)
copyhold
estates,
tom
form prescribed by the Wills Act, 1837, and only in that form
Wills Act, 1837,
ss.
3, 9.
holds depended
449)
upon custom (^Lewis v. Lane (18^4) 2 Myl. & K. though, where a custom to devise existed, a surrender to
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
587
the use of the will had been rendered unnecessary by the 55 Geo. Although the estate has been devised under Ill (1815) c. 192.
remains in the customary heir until the devisee Mead (1871) L. R. 6 Qi B. 441). But admittance of a devisee for life devests the, estate of the testator's customary heir; and the remainderman thei^eupon becomes seised, even though he never takes possession^ This v/as important before the passing of the Inheritance Act, 1833, and may, even now, be worth noting {Parker v. Thomas (J042) 3 Man. & G. 815).]
the Wills Act,
is
it
admitted {Garland \.
(iii)
any custom
by
its
owner
in parcels,
(or
on the court
rolls.
If the tenement
is
may apportion
s.
the yearly
customary rent
CopyKold Act, 1894,
(iv)
86.
copyhold
land of
may be made
to
may be made
Ibid.
s.
in respect
freehold tenure;
87.
[Presumably, this section would authorize an order for sale under the Partition Acts 1868 and 1876, as well as an order for
partition.]
(v)
no lord of
hold tenure to any person to hold in customary tenure without the consent
Digitized
by Microsoft
5^8
':5r!i
LAW
f
51
!OF
PROPERTY
when
it
ceases
be of copyhold
tenure,
and
and
common
[Such a grant is, of course, only prima facie possible By virtue of express customi, which often requires; the consent of the homage or freeholders of the manor. In such a case such consent must be duly obtained (Copyhold Act, i894,''s. 83).]
(vi)
customary court
may be
held, by
al-
-,,
,,ii,j,
V! iiiyv
,f{i
only one,
is
hKr
\
/!{</>
'
'Aisun
"t^>
notice of
it is
oil hinii
f^"
"^
month;
'"
'''"^^'^^
Iiid.s.U.
(vii),
customary
'S'O
,>!Pfn
cidi
vf;:
'
to a similar estate,
may be made, by
the
7;
ill
Tio
h\6tl
J(.'j;uio^
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
instrument, or fact, in pursuance of
589
which
the admittance
is
made
ss.
83, 84.
rolls (ibid,
^5).]
(viii)
voluntary or compulsory
enfran-
1106-1116).
lit J.
s.
I,
I,
common
(i) fines
and for breaches of custom, (ii) suit of court. Some statutes (e.g. the 12 Car. II (1660), c. 24, and the Real Property Act, 1845) expressly exclude copyholds from their operation others (e. g, the Copyhold Acts themselves) as expressly include them. Where the Act is silent, it is often difficult to know whether copyholds are affected ; and the principles to apply arp discussed in Heydon's Case (1584) 3 Rep. 7 a, where it was ruled (obiter) that the statute De Donis does not apply to copyholds, though there may be, in a given manor, a special custom to entail. The Statute of Uses (27 Hen. VIII (1535) c. 10) does not apply to copyholds (^Baker v. fFhite (1875) L. R. 20 Eq., at p. 175,^1??- Jessel, M. R.) nor to tenancy in 'antient demesne' (Cresswell v. Hawkins (1857) 3 Before 1833, copyhold tenants in tail barred the Jur. N. S., 407). entail by surrender in the manorial court; and the practice is now made statutory by ss. 50-54 of the Fines and Recoveries Act, 1833. The Real Estates Charges Acts apply to copyholds (Piper v. Piper (i860) I J. &H. 91).]
;
Alienation by
"Py^"^^^''
copyhold
estate
may
the
estates thereout in
Digitized
by Microsoft
S90
LAW OF PROPERTY
;
eustomary manner
exeepf
of
who professes
to
demise
of his
estate.
W
i.
' '
'
'
'
''
'
[The same constructioii will be put upon such limitations as upon analogous limitations of freehold estates {^Fisher v. Wigg
(1700)
(b)
I
P.
Wms.,
at
:
p.
..
,
Sutton v. Stone
(1588)' 4 Rep. i6. Hoddesdon (1594) Cro. EliZi 3JI1. Lutterel y. ti^es/ik (1611) Cro. Jac. 308 (though here the rule was 'pleaded as a special custom)
v.
as
[A demise made in defiance of this rule is not, however, void between lessor and lessee {Tresidder v. Trvsidder (r84i) i Q. B.
Q.
B. 492).]
Corporation
as copyholder
1093.
pgjjg^j
|.q
The
admit
Iprd^ of a
mauor
cannot;
be
com-
by copy of
court
poses
roll ;W may be
but qopy holds required for public purconv'ej^d to a corporation under an Act
A. G.
V.
rule as stated in Bk. I, 27, is, perhaps, too wide. But supported by more than one eminent real property lawyer (see Scriven, Copyholds, Vol. I, p. 108).].
it iis
[The
(b)
"'
' '
of
Nmiumbefland
^.
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
1094.
591
lie
No
by the lord
Actions be''"'''
of a manor against
or vice versa,
^^'f"
holder
owed by
except that
(i)
an action
may
a manor, or
on the alienation
of
copyhold tenement,
or
by the
new copy-
copyhold tenement
(a)
; C')
Shuttleworth
v.
Garnet (1687)
Mod. 240.
Evelyn
v.
(b)
Raw (1861) 6 H. & N. 308. Eraser \. Mason (1883) 1 1 Q. B. D. 574. Everest \. Glyn (i8i;) 6 Taunt. 425. Blaker v. Wells (1873) z8 L. T. 21.
Haytaardv.
[The fine is not due until after admittance (^Rex v. Hendon (1788) 2 T. R. 484; The Queen v. Lord Wellesley (1853) 2 E. & But if an heir or devisee will not take admittance, and B. 924). thus fill the vacancy on the rolls, the lord may, after due proclamations, seize the tenement quousque, i. e. until a new tenant is admitted {Twining v. Muscott (1844) 12 M. & W. 832). In the case of infant heirsor devisees, the seizure is only until payment of the fine ; the lord's claim in such a case being limited by statute (InIn the case of a lunatic, the fants' Property Act, 1830, ss. 6, 9). tenant is admitted by attorney (Lunacy Act, 1890, ss. 125-6). Before action is brought for an uncertain fine, the fine must be assessed by the lord with reasonable certainty {Fraser v. Mfson^ ubi but the Statute of Limitations begins to run against the lord sup.) from the date of the tenant's admittance {Monckton v. Payne [1899]
;
Q.
B. 603).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
592
(ii)
LAW OF PROPERTY
where the conduct of
tions
tract
an implied promise to
his obliga-
against
for
him
Blachmore
alone
;
representatives
[The origin of the principal rule is the fact that, until the end of the 15th century, copyhold tenure was not recognized by the King's Courts. It has, however, long been settled, that for any act or omission of lord or tenant which amounts to a common law tort, e. g. trespass or ejectment, an action will lie {Otlery Monastery Case (1583) I Leon. 4; Rennington v. Cole (161 8) Noy, 29); and the equitable remedies of account and ihjunction will be granted against a copyholder guilty of waste, or a lord encroaching on the copyholder's rights {Bishop of Winchester v. Knight (17 17) i P. Wms. 406; Grey v. D. of Northumberland (1806) 13 Ves. 236).]
Relief
founded
loss
tenant.
Nash \. E. of Derby (1705) z Vern. 537. Cox V. Higford (i7io)' lb. 664. Peachy v. D. of Sofuerset (1721) Pre. Cha. 567.
remedy would have been an Since the coming into operation of the Judicature Act, 1873, * -^4 (5) ^^ remedy has been given by way of equitable defence to the action of the lord
[Before the Judicature Act, the
injunction to prevent the lord suing in ejectment.
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
to recover possession of the tenement.
forfeits the
593
act or omission only
(^Peachy v.
The
of
estate of
the person
guilty
it.
D. of
1096.
A Mandamus will
to
Bench Division
manor
to
as
[It was at one time thought, that a Mandamus would not be granted on the application of an heir; inasmuch as he could enter and act as tenant before admittance {R. v. Rennett (1788) 2 T. R. But this doctrine has long been abandoned (i2. v. Brewers' 197). On the return to the order nisi, the lord may give Co., ubi sup,).
reasons for alleging that the claimant is not entitled to be admitted ; and the matter then proceeds as in an ordinary action to try a title {R. v. Coggan (1805) 6 East, 431 ; The ^een v. Dendy, A Mandamus may also be granted to compel ubi sup., p. 247). the lord to produce the manorial rolls for inspection by a party entitled (Re Hutt (1839) 7 D. P. C. 690).]
his
it
Reservation
'f ''^'""^'"'"^
of his tenement
tenements.
so as to avoid confusion
with other
D. of Leeds
Digitized
by Microsoft
594
Waste by
LAW OF PROPERTY
a
"py
'^
customary
fee,
tenement ;W and
in the absence of
[semble)
custom
[post.
Tit.
III).^
not, in
Powell (1853) 2 E.
&
B. 132.
Mellish,
Duke of Portland w. Hill (1866) L. R. 2 Eq. 765. Hext V. Gill (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. App., at p. 713, per
L. J. Eardley
Jessel, v.
E.
Granville
(1876)
Ch,
D.,
at
p.
832, fer
M.
R.
ij Ch. D. 150.
[In Fawcet
v.
Lmxither (175 1)
2 Ves. Sen:, at
p.
303, Lord
for a copy-
Hardwicke expressed the opinion that even a custom holder for life to commit waste would be bad.]
(b)
(c)
Cox V. Higford (1710) 2 Vern. 664. Reginay. Dare^ (1S61) 2 F. & F.355. Bourne v. Taylor (1808) 10 East, 189.
Hilton V. E. Granville (1845) 5
Q. B. 701.
De G.
F.
&
J.
415,
it
seems
to have been assuiped, that the lord might tunnel through the copyhold tenement to work coal in other parts of the manor ; and
a fortiori, he would be entitled to work the minerals in the tenement without disturbing the surfacp. But a stranger who works minerals, even without disturbing the surface, is guilty of trespass against the copyholder {Lewis v. Branthwaite (1831) 2 B. & Ad. 437). So too the lord is guilty of trespass, jf he uses the space below the surface for the purpose of working minerals outside the manor [Lewis V. Branthwaite, uhi,sup.).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
1099.
tion of a
595
effect that Reduced
Where
there
is
custom to the
a tenant of the
who
the
manor
him-
self to
more valuable tenement, will not on that ground be disqualified from claiming to be admitted on payment of the smaller fine.W But if in fact the
respect of a
acquisition of the smaller tenement
person alienating
it,
will not
(b)
1100*
is
Where
the
amount of
a fine
on admittance
assessed
Arbitrary
amount
by ^
[The
existence of a custom such as that described in 1099 will on the tenement first acquired a much improved value, which is the normal
amount {Holder
an
&
at p.
401) of
Digitized
by Microsoft
596
Fines in
settled
LAW OF PROPERTY
Where
the lordship of a
1101.
manor
is
the sub-
manors
by the tenant
new
grants
all
belong, in the absence of express directions in the settlement, to the tenant for life for the time being.
But where a lump sum is paid by way of compensation by an authority having power to acquire land within the _manor compulsorily for public purposes, no part of such sum can be claimed by the tenant
for life as representing fines.
(a)
W
&
S.
Earl Cowley
v.
(b)
J.
410.
Fines of
limited
1102.
j.|^g
Where
owners
or
entitled
to a charge
the interest
Bradford
Carter
(b)
Re
Brownjohn (1868) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 711. Sebright (1859) 26 Beav. 374. Bullock's Settled Estates (1905) 91 L. T. 65i.
y. v.
[For the somewhat complicated system on which the proportions Ldwson (1785) i Bro. C. C. 440, expressly followed by the Court in Bradford v. Brovinjohn,']
are calculated, see Nightingale v.
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
1103.
597
Whether
a
life
copyhold
estate
granted to a
Grants for
own
'^"
taker only, or
his
death,
is
In the
on the death of
wV.W
Randle v. Rundle (1691) 2 Vern. 252, 264. Smithy. Baker (1737) ' ^^^- 3^5(b) Clark V. Danvers (1679) i Ca. Ch. 310. Howe S.Howe (i686) i Vern. 415. Wills Act, 1837, s. 6.
[The
decision
first
is
titling the
life (2) the question of who paid the fine on admittance (3) the existence of valuable consideration by the cestuis que vie. If the grant
was
1
to the first taker and his heirs, the heir of the first taker succeeds as special occupant (JLempriere v. Martin (1777) 2 W. Bl.
148).]
Admittance
...11'*'
life
is
the admittance of
;
owners
and
where
a tenant for
the lord
-
on the admittance of
(a)
same settlement.
WhitbreadW Jenney (1804)
Richardson
(b)
v.
522.
Kensit (1845) 5
M. & G.
485.
Tiping v. Sunning (1^97) Moore, 465. Aufitetme v. Auncelme (1603) Cro. Jac. 31.
Digitized
by Microsoft
598
(c)
LAW OF PROPERTY
D.
isf
C. of Ely V. Caldecot
v.
Phyperi
Eburn (1836)
3 Bing.
Reg.
\'.
&
S.
439.
[The rule has no application where the second taker does not claim under the same settlement as the first {Reg. v. Dullingham
(1838) 8 A.
&
E. 858).]
Alienation by
1105.
lives
life or
customary
tenant for
life
create out of
same manner
life
as
Martin (1777) 2
W.
Bl.
1148.
[In the last case, the derivative interests were in fact equitable but the Court of Appeal assumed that they might have been legal. Even before the passing of the Wills Act, 1837, s. 6, there could be no general occupant of a cfopyhold estate ; and the lord might enter after the death of the tenant \Zouch v. Parse (1806) 7 East, 86).]
Voluntary
1106.
character
filling
the
enfranchise-
ment
or acting
as,
ment, notice
in
enfran-
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
599
chisement must be given to the person entitled to the next estate of inheritance in the manor or tene-
ment
respectively. (=)
(a)
Copyhold Act,
Ibid.
s. s.
(b)
(c)
s.
94.
Ibid.
14 (3).
[There are
in the case
of
Crown manors
{ibid, s.
69) ]
1107.
The
Comider-
"iWl^'an
enfranchise-
ment.
(i)
gross
sum, payable
or,
at
once or
at
an
agreed date;
(ii)
a rent
land enfranchised
(iii)
or,
a conveyance of
land,
or of a
right to
mines, or minerals,
w^hether subject to
or,
conveyance of
the manor;
or,
of
(v)
partly one
15.
when
;
the lord
is
not
owner
is
in
simple
{ibid.
The
enfranchisement
money
be a mortgagee
terest as if
it
in
fee
in
and the lord is deemed to respect thereof, and may distrain for in-
were rent
Digitized
by Microsoft
6oo
Ciimpulsory
LAW OF PROPERTY
An
admitted
tenant
1108.
(other
of copyhold
land
enfranchise-
ment
than a
to enfran-
person
of,
for
the
as,
time
lord,
the character
or acting
whether lawfully
notice, W compel chisement. W
entitled or not,W
may, by similar
accept enfran-
such a tenant to
(a)
s.
4.
(b)
(c)
94.
I
[All fines
and
fees in
arrear
claim enfranchisement
(ibid. s. 3).
on the admittance or enrolment of any tenant, to give him notice If the in statutory form of his right to obtain enfranchisement.
steward fails to give such notice, he loses his right to any fee for such admittance or enrolment (ibid, s, 42).]
Considera-
is
at
the instance of
tion/or
compulsory
enfranchise-
ment amounts
year's
improved value
such
ment
Board of Agriculture, be
sufficiently identified,
terest at
a gross
sum
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
before enfranchisement. W
steward's compensation.
(a)
(')
6oi
The
8 (i).
(b)
(c)
8 (2).
9.
is
[The method of
assessing compensation
is
regulated by
s.
7.
made by the Board of Agriculture (s. 10). A rent charge created [by way of compensation for enfranchisement may be redeemed in manner provided by the Act
(s.
30).]
oi. Alternative
'"j''"" of enfran''
chisement
might be prejudicially affected by an enfranchisement demanded by a tenant, the lord may elect, in
lieu
interest
II.
1111.
The Board
Suspension of
"'f'''""^
'"-
ment
would be
difficulty,
owing
to peculiar circumstances,
on the prospective value of the land, or where any special hardship or injustice would unavoidably result from compulsory enfranchisement.
in deciding
Digitized
by Microsoft
6o2
LAW OF PROPERTY
894,
s.
z.
Rights not
1,112.
Sir/"^
ment
the Copy-
(ii)
Kent
(iii)
any right of
tenant
common
belonging to the
(v)
or any
easement
in
connec-
in
by the party
Hid.
affected.
ss,
21-23.
[On any enfranchisement utlder the Act, a right of way or other easement for the, purpose of working mines or minerals under the enfranchised tenement may, with the consent of the tenant, be
reserved or granted to the lord
(s.
24).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
1113. Subject to 1
the
1 1
603
Effect of
2,
an epfranchisement under
Copyhold Act,
enfranchise-
ment
exempt from any local custom of descent, dower, freebench, curtesy, or any other kind whatever, and free from any estate,
socage,
and
common
manor; but
subject to
all
tenement.
Copyhold Act, i 894,
s.
[Where
the tenement
is,
at
had originally been created out of it {ibid. (3)). Where the tenant was admitted subject to any condition affecting the user of the land, imposed for the benefit of the public or the other tenants of the manor, and the enfranchisement is compulsory, the Board of Agriculture may, if in its opinion some special hardship or injustice would result if the land were released from the condition, continue and give effect to the condition by the award of enfranchisement {ibid. s. 13).]
1114.
Where
in a
manor the
General
and
it is
^^[^"'
"^'
who
are admitted as
Digitized
by Microsoft
6o4
LAW OF PROPERTY
roll
and
if at
such enquiry
appears that
not
less
enfranchisement of
make an
order accord-
and proceed
to
ascertain the
compensation
sum of money
interests in
each tenement.
Copyhold Act,
1
894,
s.
79.
[The expenses of
apportioned
{ibid. s.
79
(c)).]
Enfranchise-
1115.
^" ^
'^mmm
lam
or to enfranchise,^
a copy-
by conveyance of
Act, 1894.W
the tenant at
by
release of
of the Copyhold
But such enfranchisement will deprive law of all rights over the manorial
lands, including
commonable
rights,
which
existed
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
prive the
lord of
rights
605
tenement.
(a)
(b)
Bradsbaw
under the Settled Land Act, i88z, s. 3 (ii). ^ v. Lawson (1791) 4 T. R. 443. Wilson V. Allen (1820) i J. & W. 611. (In this case Sir Thos. Plumer appears to have thought that the fact that the copyholder had not actually been admitted was immaterial, if the beneficial interest was vested in him.) But the enfranchisement enures for the benefit of the persons really entitled to the tenement ( Wynne V. Cockes (1780) I Bro.'C. C. 515).
e. g.
Forty. Ward (i^gS) Moore, 667. Crowder v. Oldfield (1706) I Salk. 170. Deny v. Sanders [1919] i K. B. 223.
rights,
[But where the circumstances imply a grant of commonable Equity will secure them to the enfranchised tenant (Siyant v. Staker (169 1) 2 Vern. 250). And the doctrine of the text has no
application to a claim of
commonable
exist
rights in land
outside the
manor
because
these
cannot
by
reason
of the
custom
(The Copyhold Act, Tilbury v. Silva (1890) 45 Ch. D. 98. 1887, (s. 4) reserved the lord's right of escheat on enfranchise-
ment
1
in all cases
but
this
Act
2
1
is
now
(s.
escheat
when
the enfranchisement
made under
1116.
An
enfranchisement,
even
though not
Enfranchise-
made under
in
tail,
the Copyhold Act, 1894, to a tenant Zlolnl^ confers upon such tenant in tail a fee
all restrictions
hold tenement, imposed for the benefit of the lord, and not reserved by the enfranchisement, C") and from
all liabilities
It is
Digitized
by Microsoft
6o6
LAW OF PROPERTY
confers
Punn
v.
upon him
Gree/i
a fpe simple.^
3 P.
(a)
(1724)
Wms.
g.
Challoner v. Murhall (179S) z Ves. Jun, 524. Ex parte School Boardfor London (i88g) 41 Ch. D. 547. (ThU rule js now, (b) Brabant v. Wilson (1865) L. R. 2 Q. B. 44. of course, subject to s. 13 of the Copyhold Act, 1894 {ante,
S
(c)
1 1
13
n.).)
(d)
Searle v. Cooke (18,89) 43 Ch. D. 519. Ex parte School Board for London, ubi
p.
550, per
North,
J.
Customary
^''"
"
1 1,1 7.
An
is
estate
of customary freehold^
is
an
es-
tate
which
manor according
at
to the
the will of
Binghamy. Woodgate (1829) I Russ. & M. 32. Warwick v. Queen's College, Oxford (1871) L, R. 6 Ch. App. 716.
Heath
V. Dearie P905] 2 Ch. 86. Copestakev. Hoper [[1908] 2 Ch. 10.
1
report of D. of Portland v. Hill (1866) L. R. 2 Eq., at 776, shows (what indeed can hardly be doubted) that the law still recognises a peculiar form of manorial tenure known as " customary freehold," intermediate between copyhold and ordinary socage tenure. The position of true customary freeholders, i. e. customary tenants in whom the freehold is vested, is very doubtful (see Bingham v. Woodgate, ubi sup.., Bushet v. Thompson (1846) Either lord or tenant claiming to exercise any 4 C. B. 48). exceptional right in respect of the tenement, would be compelled to prove it by reference to the custom. It should be remembered, that all freehold tenants of a manor are entitled as of common right, in respect of their ancient arable land, to common of pasture over the waste of the manor (Co. Litt. 122a; Heath v. Deahe, ubi sup., at p. 91, per Joyce, J.). But the tendency of the Courts is to class every tenure as copyhold in which the estates require perfection by admittance at the hands of the lord, and to hold that in such cases the freehold is in the lord (see Burrell v. Dodd
[The
p.
Digitized
by Microsoft
COPYHOLDS
607
(1803) 3 Bos. & P. 378 ; Reay v. Huntington (1803) 4 East, 271 ; Cook V. Danvers (1806) 7 331,299; Thompson v. Hardinge (1845) 1 C. B. 940) ; and this rule is said by Fitzherbert {Nature Brevium, 14) to apply even to tenants in ' antient demesne,' i. e. tenants of a manor which was in the hands of the Crown in the days of Edward the Confessor. The practical consequence is, that the tenants of such estates are in substantially the same position as ordinary copyholders with regard to the commission of waste and other manorial incidents (Z). of Portland v. Hill^ ubi sup.) ; though at one time they may have enjoyed greater security of tenure than ordinary Tenants in antient demesne, however, are, according copyholders. to modern views, to be ranked among freeholders {Merttens v. Hill [1901] I Ch. 842).]
1118.
to
The
Extinguish'"^"* "J.
|^^^'
in like
manner
as
may compel
94.
enfran-
chisement
{ante,
1108).
1
Copyhold Act,
894,
ss z,
[Presumably, a lord entitled in fee simple may also release or extinguish such rights or incidents by deed independently of the But such a release will not destroy the tenant's Copyhold Act. rights of common {Baring v. Abingdon [18192] 2 Ch. 374).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Estate for
VI
ESTATES
is
FOR YEARS
1119.
("lease")
term of years
created by a limitation
at
common
term becomes an
estate only
when
Where
Uses (27 Hen. VIII (1535) c. 10), an estate by virtue of the statute. (")
(a)
Litt.
s.
creates
58.
a.
5y y. Smith (1561) Plowd. 269. Bishop of Bath's Case (1605) 6 Rep. 34 Sheppard, Tombstone, p. 267.
[Interests in the nature of leases in perpetuity have sometimes been authorized by statute {Robertson v. Gardiner (1852) 12 C. B. D. Ry. Co. ( 1 879) 1 1 Ch. D. 625). 319; Sevenoaks Ry. Co. v. L. C. The Settled Land Act, 1882, s. 10 (i), seems also to contemplate such interests as existing under local custom.]
(b)
,
Co.
Litt.
v.
46
b.
yic), Ise,ham
Morrice (1628) Crd, Car. 109. Banker v. Keat (1677) z Mod. 249.
[The
classification of
it, it is
terms of years
is
dealing with
difficult to
one of form ; but it appears to be the Although the interest of the lessee for
was not completely protected until the passing of the statute of 1529 (21 Hen. Vin, c. 15), it is clear that by Littleton's day it was regarded as an estate, subject at'least to some of the incidents of tenure. (Litt. s. 132.) But the influence of its originally conyears
tractual character ( 1037, note) has always prevented it being classed, technically, as real property, and, therefore, as capable of
Digitized
by Microsoft
609
Consequently, it was not a suitable subject for the normal law conveyance, viz, feoffment with livery of seisin ; and, until the passing of the Statute of Frauds in 1677, no formalities were required for the creation of a term of years. Still, as we have seen above, the common law Courts had, by Littleton's day, laid it down that, while the making of the lease created an interesse termini, which was transferable, and passed to she executors of the lessee on the latter's death, no estate arose until entry, which, however, unlike entry after livery in law, did npt necessarily take place in the lifetime of the lessor or lessee (see post, 1120). It was said, indeed, by the Court in Iseham v. Morrice {ubi sup.), that the lessor might "waive the possession"; but this dictum seems to have been without due consideration, and the necessity for entry by the lessee remains a rule of the common law. The passing of the Statute of Uses, however, paved the way for the creation of estates for years without entry ; the most important instance of which was the lease on which the conveyance by Lease and Release was founded. But, inasmuch as neither the common law nor the Statute of Uses required the employment of any special words for the limitation of a term of years \HeywarcCs Case (1595) 2 Rep. 35 a; Edward Fox^s Case (1610) 8 Rep. 94 a; Duxiury v. Sandiford (1898) 80 L. T. 552 (C. A.)), and inasmuch as it was decided in Barker v. Keat {supra) that a merely nominal consideration was sufficient to raise, a use for the purpose, it is sometimes extremely difficult to tell whether a It is clear, lease operates at common law or under the statute. however, that no one but a freeholder can limit a term by way of use ; because no one but a freeholder can be seised to uses. A more practical classification of estates for years is to be found in the objects for which they are created, i. e. whether for occupation purIt is clearly assumed in poses or by way of security for money. Littleton's well-known passages (e.g. ss. 58, 59, 66, 67), and in Coke's commentary thereupon, that the lessee for years is an occupier. But a practice, said by Barton {Modern Precedents, V, 133) to date from the reign of Elizabeth, grew up of effecting a mortgage of freeholds by granting a long term to a mortgagee at a nominal rent ; probably to prevent claims of dower by the mortgagee's widow {Nash V. Preston (1630) Cro. Car. 190), possibly also to avoid the inconvenience of having the estate and the right to receive the
common
mortgage money vested in different persons. This practice persisted of the 19th century (Barton, op. cit. Vol. V, Precedents), but is stated by Davidson in 1869 {Precedents,'^ o\. II, Again, Pt. II, p. 1008 n {a)) to have been then almost abandoned. the long terms invented by the Caroline conveyancers, under the X 2
until the beginning
Digitized
by Microsoft
i6io
system of
LAW OF PROPERTY
strict settlements,
were
for the
(Bridgman, Conveyances, pp. 225, 259, 260, 332, &c.). Finally, the familiar practice of effeoting mortgages of terms of years by the process of sub-demise, renders it impossible to identify the common
lease,
interesse ter-
1120.
ates
common
law cre-
mint
an
interesse termini in
entry,
which
interesse termini
may be
granted away
on
his death.
An
interesse termini
land by the
personal representatives, or
by any person by
lawfully acquired.
(a)
whom
the same
Co.
Litt.
46
b.
Bruerton v. Raipsford (1583) Cro. Eliz. 15. Wheeler N. Tborogped {1 ^8g) Cro. Eliz. 127. Barwick's Case (1597) S Rep. 93 b.
Doe
V.
Day (1842)
Q. B.,
at p.
156.
[The
assignee
ment of an
immediately
I
he
accepts
the
Bosanquet (1819)
(b)
Litt.
s.
B.
&
B. 238).]
58.
Co.
Litt.
46
b.
J'oyner'v. Wee'ks
[1891] 2 Q. B.,
at p.
J.
Not an
estate
1121.
An
interesse termini
may be
released
(but
Digitized
by Microsoft
6ii
But the
dis-
by way of
release/''^
nor can he
lease
;
train
on the land
by the
W and
interesse
Salmon v. Swam (1621) Cro. Jac. 619. Rawlings v. Walker (1826) 5 B. & C, at p. 118, per Bay ley,
interesse
J.
[An
termini
is,
in
fact,
mere contract
{jfoyner
v.
at p.
459.
Sheppard, Touchstone, p. 324. Williams -v. 'Bosanquet{iS ig) i B. & B., at p. 257. (c) Because there is, in fact, no reversion in the lessor till the lessee has entered {Smith v. Day (1837) 2 M. & W. 684). (d) Rawlings v. Walker, aii sup.
[On
interesse termini
in the
same person, there is no enlargement of the former {Lewis [1905] I Ch. 46).]
Baker
1122,
titling
The owner of a valid interesse termini enhim to immediate possession of the land may
(")
Rights of
"^"J^^jJ
termini
or a stranger
C")
or
damages
for
non-delivery
thereof.
(a)
Coe
V.
Jinks
(b)
V.
Doe
V.
5 Bing. 440 (? only an Edwards (1856) 11 Exch. 775. Day (1841) 2 Q. B. 147.
Cky (1829)
\^uare : would the owner of an interesse termini be entitled to enforce hi$ claim against a bona fide purchaser of the legal estate in
Digitized
by Microsoft
6l2
reversion
LAW OF PROPERTY
who,
at the date
his
claim ? The dicta in the two cases of Gillard v. Cheshire Lines Committee (1884) 32 W. R. 943, and Joyner v. Weeks [1891], 2 Q. B. 31, as to the nature of an interesse termini appear to be irreconcileable ; notwithstanding the fact that two of the learned judgea took part in both cases.]
Actions
against-
1123.
The owner
of a valid
interesse termini
may
strangers
of ^ the land.W
enjoyment, unless
he has attempted
prevented by the
to take possession,
lessor
or
some person
under him.W
(a)
Gillard v.
(b)
Cheshire Lines Committee (1884) 32 W. R. (C. A.). Ryan v. Clarke (1849) 14 Q. B., at p. 73, per Patteson, J.
943
[But, semble, if he recovered possession by ejectment, he could sue for trespass committed since his title to possession accrued {Barnett v. E. of Guildford (1856) 1 1 Exch. 19 ; Ocean Accident Co. V. Ilford Gas Co. [1905] 2 K. B. 493) 1
(c)
Liabilities
of
1124.
The owucr
of an
etry
reserved, C")
even
before
entry.
Digitized
by Microsoft
613
This would seem to follow from the fact that a covenant is a contract ; even though no estate has yet been created by the lease. But would an assignee of the interesse termini be liable ? (b) Bellasis v. Burbriche (1696) I Ld. Raym. 170. (The rule is
different in tenancies at will.)
1125.
Where
take effect
Reversionary
lease
the reversion
entitled to
upon the earlier term, and will be enter on the land on the expiry of such
earlier term.
Joyner
v.
at p.
this case and that of upon the first term. In such a case (e. g. Colehourn's i^ Mixtone's Case (1588) i Leon. 129, as corrected in Rawlings v. Walker (1826) 5 B. & C, at p. 123), the lessor will have lost his right to distrain for the rent reserved by the first lease. In other words, a reversionary lease and a lease of a reversion arc two different things.]
a lease of
reversion
1126.
The
date of the
commencement and
the
Limits of
term
by the lease creating it. But provision must be made by the lease for fixing such date or duration in the lifetime of the lessor; and the
specifically fixed
lease will
be good only
if a
accordingly.
7. L. V. Potkin (1522) Y. B. 14 Hen. VIII, Mich., Brudnel, C. J. Rector of Chedington' s Case (1598) i Rep. 152 b.
at
fo.
14, per
case
(This
Digitized
by Microsoft
6 14
suggests
parties. )
LAW OF PROPERTY
that
%>
the
fixing
must
be
in
the
lifetimes
of
both
the
Bishop' of BaiF s Case (1605) 6 Rep. 35. Kirsley v. Duck (17 12) 2 Vern. 684.
[The cases show that there is some vagueness as to the amount of certainty requisite to constitute a good term of years.]
Commencelerm
1127.
When
the time of
to take effect
from the making thereof^ or " from henceforth," the term is deemed to begin on the delivery of the lease. W But when the term is expressed to commence " from " the day of the date or making
of the lease,^ or
will
"from"
unless
it
date respectively
lease effectuarl,
it is
begin
imme-
diately or
(a)
on the
Co. Litt. 46 b. Goddard's Case (1584) 2 Rep. 5 a. Clayton's Case (1585) J Rep. i. Osbourn v. Rider (1606) Cro. Jac. 133. Llewelyn v. Williams (1610) Cro. Jac. 258, Hatter v. Ash (1696) I Ld. Raym. 84. Doe V. Benjamin (1839) 9 A. & E, 644.
lease is not made by deed, and the date of not fixed, the term will begin on the day on which the writing was executed, or the oral bargain made (yaques V. Millar (1877) 6 Ch. D. 153). But a mere agreement to grant a lease, without specifying when the term is to commence, is void for uncertainty {Marshall\. Berridge (1881) 19 Ch., D. 233).]
\Semhle^
where the
is
commencement
(b)
Barwick's Case (1597) 5 Rep. 94 a. -Anon. (161 1) I Bulstr.atp. iyj,per Fleroming, C. Cornish v. Caway (1648) Aleyn, 75.
Styles V.
J.
Wardle (i8z6) 4 B.
&
C. '908.
Digitized
by Microsoft
615
&
E. 879.
of course, otherwise when the term is to begin " on " a Holland [^iSgs] i Q- B. 378).]
Cowp. 714.
Contingent
^^''""
to
commence, or
is
liable to
be determined,
on the happening of a contingency, W or is only to last until the happening of an uncertain event,W does
not prevent
it
meaning of
(a)
1119.
Litt.
Co.
45
b.
Sheppard, Touchstone, 274, 284. GoBdright v. Richardson (1789) 3 T. R. 462. (b) Doe V. Clarke (1807) 8 East, 183.
[It was said in Pennant's Case (1596) 3 Rep. 65, properly worded condition, an estate for years might
that,-
under a
void,
become
without necessity for entry or other act of avoidance by the lessor, on the happening of a contingency ; and this doctrine is repeated in But it seems to be the better opinion, that Sheppard, op. cit. 284. the lessor may waive the forfeiture ; in other words, that the 'lease becomes voidable only, not void, on the happening of the contin{Rede v. Farr (1817) 6 M. & S. 121.) Where the term gency. is limited " until " the happening of an event, or " if tlie lessee shall so long, live," it comes to an end on the event happening or the
lessee dying {Dae v. Clarke., ubi SHp.).^
1129.
may
it
X3
Digitized
by Microsoft
6i6
period. (^)
LAW OF PROPERTY
But
a
mere licence to
and
at a fixed
fol-
lowed by
(a)
entry.
e*)
Edward
Duxbury
[If the term
is
v.
to operate
must have an
(b)
estate
v.
Watkins
Covenant for
^'"''""^
'
1130.
may
contain a covenant
it
;
term granted by
and such
covenant for
and
petuity
C")
own
right will be
void.^'^)
And. 82.
Jnon. (1584) Moore, 159. Richardson v. Sydenham (1705) 2 Vern. 447. Brook V. Bulkeley (1752) 2 Ves. Sen. 498. Muller V. Tr afford [1901] 1 Ch., at p. 60, fer Farwell, (b) Bridges v. Hitchcock (i7i'5) S Bro. P. C. 6. Re Mayor and Corporation of London [19 10] 2 Ch. 314. E. of Mount Edgecumbe v. Commrs. of Inland Revenue
J.
[19I1]
647.
2
(c)
K. B. 24.
V.
Hope
De G. M. & G.
[Of
in
the covenantor, not (in the absence of special powers) any estate
remainder or reversion on
it
Digitized
by Microsoft
617
Single cove-
by implication/')
is
a cqvenant to
renew
"""'
is
presumed to be exhausted by a
the lessee
inserted in the
(a)
single exercise;
and
renewed
v.
lease. (""^
3 Atk. 83.
Furnitialv.
Crew (1744)
(b)
Beach (1823) 13 Beav. 478. Hare v. Surges (1857) 4 K. & J. 45. Iggttldeny. May (1806) 7 East, 237. Dowlingy. Af/7/(i8i6) i Madd. 541.
Brown
Hare
v.
v.
Tighe (1834) 2 CI. & F. 396. Burges, ubi sup., at p. 54, per Wood, V. C.
(lives).
[But see the remarks of Selbofne, C, in Swinburne (1884) L. R. 9 App. Ca., at p. 850 (lives).]
v.
Milhurn
1132.
An
estate
from year
:
Yearly ten""'^
ancy
")
is
created by
(i)
any expressions in
estate
a lease
can be gathered;
7
Clarke
v.
Smaridge (1845)
is
Q.B.,
at p.
J.
expressed to create a tenancy ' for one year and so on from year to year,' or to that effect, the yearly tenancy does not begin till the expiry of the first year, and cannot, consequently,
[If the lease
in the absence of express provision, be determined before the end of the second {Denn v. Cartright (1803) 4 East, 31 ; Chidborn v. Cannon Brewery v. Nash (1898) Green (1839) 9 A. & E. 658) 77 L. T. 648).]
;
(ii)
for
life, at
Eliz.
(1778) 2
W,
Bl.
Digitized
by Microsoft
6i8
(iii)
LAW OF PROPERTY
an occupation by permission of the owner of land, ^uhder a void
lease,
followed by
or
some aliquot
part thereof.
In
lease,
Doe
Lee
V.
Magdalen
p.
Knotts (1879) L.
R. 4 App. Ca.,
at
[It seems a little doubtful how far this doctrine would apply if the lease were void under the provisions of a disabling statute. Both Lord Cairns and Lord Selborne, in Magdalen College Hospital
V. 'Knotts, uii sup.,
seem
to
have thought
that'it.vwouldi.]
(iv)
of rent,
determination
of a previous
nual rent.
'
definite tenancy, at
an an-
will continue to be
(')
unless
there
is
evidence of agreement
(''
to
the
contrary.
(a)
Ri^U V. Darby (1786) iT. R. 159. Doe V. Watts (1797) 7 T. R. 83. tSishop v. Howard (1823) 2 B. & C.
100.
(In this case
no rent had
Wedd
V. Porter [1916] 2
K. B,
91,
Digitized
by Microsoft
619
who
land, and
vendor
v.
(^Ball v. Cullimore
(1835)
2 C.
M. &
R. 120;
Howard
Shaw (1841) 8 M.
& W.
"8)0
1133.
Determiua-
^UlanJ'"^'^
which the
where the
and
lessee
where
certain
a receiving order in
('')
Where
determine
term expires
necessary
at
event,
('')
no notice
to
is
except
in pursuance
of a
(a)
statute.
Legg
V. Strudiaick v. Cartright
Denn
[Where the original term was for more than a year, a tenancy from year to year created by holding over and. payment of rent notice expiring. on an ( 1 132 (iv.) ), can only be determined by anniversary of the expiry of the original term {Croft v. Blciy [1919]
2 Ch, 343)-]
(b)
(c)
s.
22,
r.
Messenger v. Armstrong (1785) i T. R., at p. 1 54 1 per Lord Right V. Dariy (ijS6) ibid., at p. 162 j Mansfield, C. J. Cobb V. Stokes (1807) 8 East, 358. (d) BromJieUv. Smith (1805) 6 East, 530. (e) The Agricultural Holdings Act, 1908 (s. 12 (2)), entitles the tenant of a mortgagor, whose lease is not binding on the mortgagee, in the case of all holdings to which that Act applies (s. 48), to six months' notice of termination by the latter, if the tenant holds at a
Digitized
by Microsoft
6^o
LAW OF PROPERTY
rack rent, and his term was originally not for longer than twenty-one years. It appears that the wider provision of the Tenants Compensation
Act,
1890
is
,(s.
occupiers of land,
now
col. 3.
Option
to
1134.
-j^
When,
determine
is
entitled to deterlease
before the
intention to
of, his
must be given
of the
lessor,
(b)
Doe
v.
Hixon (1807) 9
East, 14.
Rent
1135.
It
is
But
if a rent
is
it
must be
re-
and must be of
lessor
amount
and the
cannot reserve
own
of the land.W
(a)
Litt. s.
58.
346.
Digitized
by Microsoft
621
213.
(d)
Parker v. Harris (1692) i Salk. 262. (But the amount may depend upon subsequent events {^Selby v. Greaves (1868) L. R. 3 C. P. 594)-) Co. Litt. 142 a.
rent need not consist of
[The
money (Doe
v.
Benham (1845)
And there seems no objection to a reservation as 7 Q. B. 976). rent of a part of the ore produced under a mining lease [Buckley v.
Kenyan (1808) 10 East, 139.)]
lease
estate
is
annexed and
lessor in
Rent incident
to reversion
of the
may be
more
persons ("severance");
from time
is
to time, the
properly attributable
estate,
owners
of such
estate in
co-owners. C")
(a)
s.
10.
(b)
1881 but, where the rent was reserved in money or other divisible matter, the rule was the same at common law (Co. Litt. 148).) Though there is no definition of the word "severance" in the Conveyancing Act, it seems clear, from the examples of severance given in this passage by Coke, that this was the kind of severance contemplated by the common law rule. The examples are (1) purchase of part of the lessee's estate by the lessor,
after
:
made
31st December,
(2) recovery of part of the land by the lessor in an action of waste, (3) grant or devise of part of the reversion, (4) lawful eviction by the lessor of the lessee from a part of the land
{William Clunks Case {\6\i') 10 Rep. 128 a); be added (5) similar eviction by a stranger by
to
title
Digitized
by Microsoft
622
{Smith
,
LAW OF PROPERTY
V.
parceners
(^w^r
local
Malings (1607) Cro. Jac. l6o), (6) partition among v. Moyle (1600) Cro. Eliz. 771), (7) descent
lieirs, e. g.
by common
law and
whether,
custom
{ii.).
at the
common
But
There was
at
ppinioti of
Coke
ultimately prevailed.
The
have the apportionment made by a jury Of course, no {Bliss V. Collins (1822) 5 B. &. Aid. 876). division of the land which the lessee may make can affect the But liability of every part of the land for the v?hole of the rent. the purchaser of part of the land is not personally liable, even while the term is vested in him, for more than his due proportion of the rent, based on the value of the land at the time when the
lessee
is
entitled to
'
severance was
made
{"Salts \.
Battersby
[1910]
K. B. 155).
When
^"^'^
rent
^
1137.
Where no
is
of
of the
year as
term W
is
of >the
rent-C")
it is
Jf the rent
a x:ed
sum
for the
whole term^
pay-
Coomber
v.
Howard (1845)
C. B. 440.
(b)
Collettv. Curling (1847) lo'Q. B. 785. Where no express term is mentioned, the period in respect of
the rent
is
which
(c)
be some indication of the intended length <Jf the term {Wilkinson y. Hall (1837) 3 Bing. N. C. 508). There appears to be no authority for this proposition ; but it is conpayable
wrill
(d)
'
due on the whole of the day (and therefore cannot be distrained for) till after midnight of that day (D/^^/i? v. 5water (1853) 2 E. &'B., at p. 568, /i?r Lord Campbell, C. J.). Warrington {? Harrington) v. Wise (1596) 2 Rolle, Ab. 449-450,
ceived that
it
is
correct.
Rent
is
is
on which
it is
payable, but
not in arrear
Digitized
by Microsoft
623
Prima facie,
but
if
^"^
''"^^^
was granted
lessee, in
for a
particular
addition to his
to
use
the
for
land
in
any
manner reasonpurpose or
ably
necessary
carrying
out such
purposes. W
(a)
Elwes
v.
(b)
Robinson
Elwes
V.
Brigg Gas Co. (1886) 33 Ch. D. 562. v. Milne (1884) 53 L.J. Ch. 1070, per North, Brigg Gas Co., ubi sup.
to
J.
[There appears
be singularly
little
authority regarding
the
The general rights of the lessee for years, as against the lessor. apparent anomaly probably arises from the facts (i) that, in the great
majority of cases, these rights are settled by the express terms of the lease, and (2) that, in the absence of such express terms, the
position
of the lessee
(/larf.
is
Sect.
III).]
1139.
is
entitled, notwithstand-
Estovers
ing the provisions of the law against waste, but subject to the terms of his
lease,' to
1074).
41 b.
140.
is
determined
is
Emblements
Digitized
by Microsoft
624
entitled
to
LAW OF PROPERTY
emblements, or the statutory substitute
1
therefor (
life
141 ), in the same manner as a tenant for in similar circumstances ( 1075).^ But a lessee
for years
date,
whose term expires at a fixed and certain has no right to emblements or any substitute
;
therefor
Co.
Litt.
Litt.
s.
56
a.
(b)
68.
v.
Wigglesworth
Dallison (1779)
Dougl. 201.
[The
right to
Substitutefor
1141.
^.^^j^
When
j^
ements
^^^^
estate
terest,
of any landlord entitled for any uncertain inthe lessee, instea.d of claims to emblements,
to
will
continue
farm or
the
lessor's
the
determination
of the
year.
As between the
and the
is
lessee, no'
.
-necessary.
s.
i.
Compensaprovements
1142.
Except
l?y
virtue of
express
agreement,
is
not
Digitized
by Microsoft
625
made by
him, or
fixtures erected
Caldecott V. Stnphies
Mousley
v.
[By far the most important exception from the general rule is to be found in the provisions of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1908, under which agricultural tenants (including tenants of market gardens) can obtain compensation for improvements and fixtures
(ss.
I 11).
The
is
a lease
which
12)
agreement
specially
(s.
5).
The method
is
provided
15).
by the Act
similar protection
extended to the tenants of allotments and cottage gardens by the Allotments and Cottage Gardens Compensation for Crops Act, As to the right 1887, and the Tenants Compensation Act, 1890. of a tenant for years to remove fixtures set up by him, see post^ Sect,
II, Tit. III.]
1143.
'
made unact of
Waste by
^'""f"''
years
is
liable to
an action for
damages or an account,
(*^
if
is
he commits any
(?)
guilty of permissive
W
a
W
is
1078)
[semble)
(a)
Ill
(1267))
c.
23.
67.
Digitized
by Microsoft
626
(b)
Lift.
s.
LAW OF PROPERTY
71.
Co. Litt. 53 a. Leach v. Thomas (1835) 7 C. & P. ^zj,per Patteson, J. Telkwly V. Gozver (1855) 11 Excih., at p. 294, /^r Panke, B. Davieiy. Bavies (1888) 38 Ch. D. 499.
[Tkere was, at one time, a good deal of doubt whether a tenant for years is liable for permissive waste (Re CcLrtwright (1889) 41 Ch. D. 532) ; but, so far as agricultural holdings are concerned, it v. Porter [1916] 2 was laid down by the Court of Appeal in K. B. 9r, that even a tenant from year tec year is, in the absence of express provision, liable to cultivate in a husbandlike manner, according to the custom of the country.]
WeM
(c)
Doherty
v.
Meux
(d)
V.
Cohley [iS'gz] z
v.
Tarriam
Allman (1878) L. R. 3 App. Ca. 709. Ch. 253. Yokng (1833) 6 C. & P. 8.
[The
peculiarities
n.).
noted ( 1077
The
of the action of waste have been previouslyprovision in the Judicature Act, 1873,5. 25
Alienation
1144.
ys^rs-
lar""
may
any smaller
so
it
almost^ unnecessary to quote however, important to note the difference between an alienation of the lessee's estate (" assignment ") and an under-lease for part of the original term. By whatever words effected {Parmenter v. Webber (1818) 8 Taunt.. 593), an alienation of any part of the land for the whole term makes the alienee a
decisions, that
It is,
and
authority for
it.
tenant of the original lessor, and, therefore, liable to the lessor, so long as the estate remains in him (the alienee), by privity of estate, for the rent and covenants of the lease, in respect of that part of
the land {post, 1146). standing any assignment.
remains liable notwiththe other hand,*an alienation for part only of the original term makes the alienee a tenant of the original lessee, and, therefore, only an under-lessee, without privity of estate, of the original lessor, who cannot charge the alienee perlessee- also'
The
On
Digitized
by Microsoft
627
v.
1779; Palmer
it,
Edwards (1783)
ibid.
on terms, is valid ; for breach almost the only cause of forfeiture against which no relief can be given to an immediate lessee, either under statute (Conveyancing Act, 1881, s. 14) or under the general jurisdiction of the Court {Barrow v. Isaacs [i8gi] i Q. B. 417 ; Eastern
under-letting, either absolutely or
of such a condition
is
Telegraph Co. v. Dent [1899] i Q. B. 835). But an underlease granted in defiance of such a prohibition none the less confers an interest in the land ; though it is a ground of forfeiture {Parker v. Jones [1910] 2 K. B. 32).]
1145.
son in
vested,
A transfer of the lessee's estate to the perwhom for the time being the reversion is
Surrender
"^"^
by w^hatever words effected, W operates as a surrender, and (subject to 1041) destroys the lessee's But when a mesne estate is estate by merger.^")
surrendered,
as against
which
confers,
gations of the
merged
estate in respect
of such term
estate.^
(1851) 7 Exch. 143.
s.
Cottee v. Richardson
(b)
(c)
Co.
Litt.
337
b.
9.
[At the common or by operation of law, of a term out of which a sub-term had been created, destroyed the reversion on the sub-term, the owner of which, therefore, ceased to be liable for rent and other incidents of
law, a surrender, whether by act of the parties
Digitized
by Microsoft
628
LAW OF PROPERTY
In practice this rule caused extreme inconvenience, and was partially altered by s. 6 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1730, which applied only to terms That section is still in force surrendered in order to be renewed.
in a recent case {Plummer v. David [1920] i K. B. '326). For the case in which a trustee in bankruptcy disclaims a mesne term under his statutory powers, see Bankruptcy Act, 1914,
s.S4(3H6).].
Covenants
1146.
The
of covenants
^lan7"^^"
^^^ conditions in a
thereon.^'')
Where
of the
reversion
is
entitled
to
enforce
all
conditions and
and, in the
case
of leases in writing
all
made
after 31st
the assignees of any part of the reversion, notwithstanding severance, and notwithstanding the avoid-
ance or cesser of the term in respect of any other part of the land originally comprised in the lease.W
(a)
This
is
older phrase
the language of the Gonveyancing Act, 1881, .s. 10 (i). The was " which touch and concern." (As to the meaning of
the restrictibn, see Horsey Estate v. Steiger [1899] 2 Q. B. 79; Ricketts v. Enfield Churchwardens [1909] i Ch. 544 ; Dyson v. Forster [1909] A. C, at p. loz). (b) Covenants Act, 1540, ss. I, 2; Conveyancing Act, 1881, ss. 10, 11.
Digitized
by Microsoft
629
[It will be observed that the later statute contains no provision on the subject of the benefit of conditions passing to assignees of the term (s. 11). But, j-i?wW/?, both the covenants and conditions implied by law ran at common law both with the term and the reversion QVedd V. Porter [1916] 2 K. B. 91) and the wording of the Act of 1540 is general in this respect. It seems that there is no statutory authority for saying that the burden of covenants and conditions passes with an assignment of the term but the rule of the common law is implied in numerous decisions, e.g., Williams v. Bosanquet (1819) I B. & B. 238.; Moule V. Garrett (1872) L. R. 7 Exch. loi. The Act of 1540 is expressly confined to indentures and even the Conveyancing Act is restricted in its application to written leases {jBlane V. Francis [1917] I K. B. 252). The benefit of the reversionary rights conferred by the latter Act may be enforced by " the person from time to time entitled, subject to the term, to the income of the whole or any part, as the case may be, of the land leased " (ibid.,
; ; ;
S.IO(I)).]
(c)
1859,
5- 3-
whenever made.)
law, severance of the reversion, if it was e.g., by inheritance among co-parceners, did not destroy the benefit of a condition (Co. Litt. 215 a ; Piggott V. Middlesex C. C. [1909] 2 Ch. 134). It is hardly necessary to observe, that no severance of the lessee's interest can prevent the liabilities of the lease being enforced against the whole of the land
at the
[Even
common
effected
by operation
of law,
s.
12
(i).
[It must be carefully observed, that neither the common law nor any statute confers, in the absence of expressions to the contrary, on any person other than the assignee of the reversion or of the term, any rights in respect of " running " covenants or condiThus, for example, an under-lessee cannot claim the benefit tions. of a covenant entered into by the head lessor with the under-lessor even though the head lessor has acquired the under-lessor's estate, and the effect of the breach of covenant is to damage the underlessee (^South of England Dairies Co. v^ Baker [1906] 2 Ch. 631). On the other hand, a covenant which " runs with the land," entered into since the passing of the Real Property Act, 1845, s. 5, can, if expressed to be made in favour of a stranger to the lease, be enforced by that stranger's successors in title [Dyson v. Forstef
[1909] A. C. 98).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
630
Condition
against
alienation
LAW OF PROPERTY
Where
the lease contains a covenant or
1147.
condition to the effect that the lessee shall not aswith the possession, or dispose of
lessor,
withheld
(i)
(')
but
when such
unrea-
may
C")
Jenkins
y. V.
Price [<)o^
Ch. no.
(b)
Trehar
[A declaration of the Court that the lessee is entitled to assign may also now be obtained {^Evans v. Levy [1910].! Ch. 452).]
(ii)
damages
grant permission in
have happened
Trehar
v. v.
Andrew
Bridgman [1908]
K.
B., at p.
Hardy,
M. R.
4
(iii)
no
fine or
sum of money
(in the
in the nature of a
fine
may
Digitized
by Microsoft
631
such a fine
tive
C')
3.
1]
is
retrospec-
"
(b)
unreasonableness
v.
" or
not.)
Andrew
Bridgtnan [1908]
alienation, except
alienate
i K. B. 596. (But a refusal to allow upon payment 'of a fine, entitles the lessee to
without permission.)
(iv)
of the rent and performance of the covenants during the remainder of the term
is
(*)
;
but a
to be
an
increased
is;
rent
W
decision
Watte
(b)
v. Jennings [1906] 2 K. B. 11. Jenkins v. Price [1907] 2 Ch. 229. on appeal ; but on another point.)
(The
was reversed
(v)
to assign to a corporation
in the ab-
and
so is a refusal to
lessee's wife,
except upon condition of the assignor undertaking responsibility during the whole
of the term.W
(a)
(b)
Jenkins y. Price \\<^o%\ i Ch. no. Willmott V. London Road Car Co. [19 10] 2 Ch. 525. Evans v. Levy [1910] i Ch. 452.
Digitized
by Microsoft
632
Liability
LAW OF PROPERTY
When
a lease
of
1148.
assignee
com-
mitted while the term was vested in him, and except in so far as he
express contract. W
in
respect of such
but he
is
entitled to be
whom
v.
when such
1
rent
other Barnf
Jordan (1780) 2 Burr. 4521 \- (rent). (1781) ibid. 764 Taylor v. Shum (1797) I B. & P. zi J Beardman v. Wilson (1868) L. R. 4 C. P. 57 (covenants).
Chanc-ellor v. Poole
[It
makes no
was
in defiance of an
C. express covenant in the lease {Paul v. Nurse (1828) 8 B. Quare : if there 486; Re Johnson [1894] i Mans. 54 (C. A.).)
&
Waite v. Jennings [1906] z K. B. 11. Burnett v. Lynch (i8z6) 5 B. & C. 589. Mouley. Garrett (187Z) L. R. 7 Exch. loi. (But the liability to indemnify only attaches to assignees in the ordinary sense of the term, not to execution creditors {Johns v. Pink [1900]
,
Ch. 296).)
Re-entry by
1149.
tioned,
A lessor
men-
Digitized
by Microsoft
633
whom
the term
is
a condition
efFect.W
But
if
and
of re-entry or not,^
on application
tress for
to
two
diary magistrate, W in
entitled to have
on non-
payment of
(a)
rent,
Wilhon v. Phillips (1824) 2 Bing. 13. Darke v. Bow ditch (1846) 8 Q. B. 973.
[The enforcement of conditions of re-entry in leases is subject to (See post^ Sect. Ill, Tit. I).] important statutory restrictions.
(b)
(c)
.
Deserted Tenements Act, 181 7. Metropolitan Police Courts Act, 1840, Stipendiary Magistrates' Act, 1858, s.
s.
s.
13.
i.
(d)
(e)
16.
v.
Hodgkinson
Andertofi's
Crowe (1875) L. R. 10 Ch. App. 662. and Milner's Contract (1890) 45 Ch. D. 476.
1150.
When
the term
created
by
lease
is
has
en-
Recovery by
"^ll"T
'^'"^
(^)
Digitized
by Microsoft
634
LAW OF PROPERTY
fine,
the lessor
may
obtain
from two
petty
war-
For
and
[A tenant who holds over after the determination of his term, after demand and written notice, is liable to pay double value (Landlord and Tenant Act, 1730, s. i) and a tenant who fails to
;
up possession on the expiry of a notice of quitting given by him is liable to pay double rent (Distress for Rent Act, 1737, s. 18) for the .period during which he retains possession.]
deliver
(b)
Small Tenements Recovery Act, 1838, Metropolitan Police Courts Act, 1839, Stipendiary Magistrates' Act, 1858, ss.
s.
i.
s.
i
14.
and
2.
1832,
s.
s.
m), War
Office lands
(Defence Act, 1859, *> S)i ^""^ Admiralty lands (Admiralty "Lands and Works Act, 1864, s. 12). But these are
Liability for
quiet enjoy-
ment
undertaken by the
lessor in respect
of the
is
a lia-
enjoyment by the
lessor's
lessee
during the
the land.W
continuance of the
interest in
Such
liability
all
those of
but
it
Digitized
by Microsoft
635
tort-feasors/'')
and
it is
doubtful if
title
it
claiming by
(a)
paramount.
Sheppard, Touchstone, 165. Hallv. City of London Brewery Co. (1862) 2 B. & S. 737. Baynes v. Lhyd [1895] i 'Q. B. 820. (But see the doubt expressed by Kay,, L. ]., in delivering the judgment of the C. A., in [1895] 2 <2. B.. atp. 615.)
Hart
[" Quiet enjoyment " means absence of physical interference with the enjoyment of the premises, not mere disturbance by noise, invasion of privacy, or the like {Browne v. Flower [191 1 J i Ch. 228,
per Parker,
J.
But
see
Harmer
v.
XXXVII
(b)
T. L. R. 91.]
Swan V. Stransham (1567) Dyer, 257 Adams v. Giiney (1830) 6 Biijg. 656.
Baynes
v. Lloyd, ubi sup.
(c)
(d)
(e)
v. Paget [1908] i Ch. 697. Andrew's Case, (1591) Cro. Eliz. ZI4, approved
Markham
in
Markham
v.
Paget, ubi sup. Bandy v. Cartright (1853) ^ Exch. 913 \( a\ ''' Hall V. City of London Brewery Co., ubi sup. J Jones V. Lavington [1903] i K. B. 253, approved
*-
in"!
Markham
Budd-Scott
v.
V.
Mneg.).
J
[It has been the subject of acute controversy whether the employment of the word "demise," or, before the passing of the Real Property Act, 1845 (s. 4) the word ", grant," in a lease, Russell, created an implied warranty of title to grant the lease. C. J., in Baynes v. L/ay^/ [1895] i Q. B. 820, thought that it did; but his view was repudiated by the Court of Appeal ([1895] 2 Q. B. 610), and, if the authorities quoted by the C. J. are examined, it will be found that the only decision (as distinct from dictci) which involves the proposition, is the old case of Holder v. Taylor (16 14) Hob. 12, where the Court of Common Pleas allowed a lessee by "demise " to recover damages against his lessor before It is curious that the Real Property Act, 1845, should eviction. not have included the word " demise " within the scope of section 4 ; and the omission may be claimed as an argument by either ^are : when the term is created by party to the controversy, way of use, is there any liability at all on the part. of the lessor?]
Digitized
by Microsoft
636
Warranty of
LAW OF PROPERTY
speaking,
there
is
1152. Generally
no implied
"
condition or warranty ( 342) by the lessor in a lease for years that the premises leased are suitable for the
But where
house
is
let
habitation, and
it
may
any
sustained
from entering
a contract has
letting
And where
been made
after
at a rent
urban
district
last
any other area sixteen pounds, there will be an implied condition to the effect that the house
is,
at the
Sutton V.
Hart
(b)
(c)
Temple (1843) 12 M. & W. 52. Windsor (iS/^i) ibid. 68. Keates\. Cadogan (1851) 10 C. B. 591. Lane v. Cox [1897] i Q. B., at p. 417, per Lord Esher, Wilson V. Finch-Hatton (1877) 2 Ex. D. 336. Smithy. Marrable (1843) 11 M. & W. 5. Birdy. Lord Greville (1884) Cab. & E. 317K-..
v.
. .
M.
R.
(d)
280
('^''' '^^""^^
[In the
case
it
was
Housing,
certain^
lessee.)
Town
14.
(The
section
when
the letting
it is
is
upon terms
that
to be
made
fit
for occupation
by the
Digitized
by Microsoft
637
not, in the
effect
Repairs 6y
^^""'
to
any
or
leased.
But
the
sentence of
there
is
an implied
shall,
respects reasonably
for
human
(a)
habitation/'')
(b)
Pomfrety. Ricrofl (1670) i Wms. Saund. 321. Gott V. Gandy (1853) 2 B. & C. 845. Housing, Town Planning, &c.. Act, 1909, s. 15.
authority to carry out the undertaking or insist on
(The
its
section
There does not appear to be any provision in the Act to prevent the exclusion, by express contract, of the terms of ss. 14 and 15. But, in the cases to which the similar provisions of s. 75 of the Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890, also apply,, contracting out is forbidden by s. 12 of the Housing of the 'Working
Classes Act, 1903.)
1154.
Satisfied
by express declaration or by operation of law, beneficially vested in or in trust for the owner of the
inheritance out of
terms
which
it
and determines
it
is
attendant.^
But
if
January,
1846,
it
determination, to
afforded, if
it
would have
Digitized
by Microsoft
638
LAW OF PROPERTY
had not been dealt with, 31st December, 1845.W
to subsist, but
(a)
Satisfied
had continued
after
s.
2.
(b)
Ibid.
s.
is obscure and difHcuk ; but, be said to have arisen out of the practice, previously referred to ( 1037, note), of creating long terms at nominal or no These terms rents and liabilities, for the purpose of raising money. were often (though by no means invariably) created by family settlements ; and, wrhen they were redeemed by the owner of the inheritance, or acquired by a purchaser, they were not surrendered to him, but, with excessive caution, kept alive for his benefit, so that he might be able to shelter himself behind them in the event of his title to the inheritance proving defective. The practice not only increased the cost of conveyancing ; but, bwing to the complications it produced, gave rise to more mistakes than it prevented. As to when a term becomes " attendant," or " satisfiedj" for the purposes of the Act, see Anderson \. Pignet (r872,), L. R. 8 Ch. App. 1 80, which was not, however, a settlement term. That decision *suggestS' that, notwithstanding the Satisfied Terms Act, a term is never deemed to be "attendant" if Equity would prevent its merger.]
[The
briefly,
it
may
Any term,
years,
r
at least
two hun-
money
value
is
is
and in respect of
be determined
unless
it
is
which there
reversioner,
no right or
trust
of redemption in the
may, unless
it is
liable to
by re-entry
sub-term created out of a term itself not capable of enlargement under this ,W be enlarged by declaratory deed by the
owner thereof W
owner of
Digitized
by Microsoft
639
all trusts,
ment, and to
affected
all
obligations,
if it
vi^hich
would have
the
term
had, np,t
been enlarged.^
were unsevered in
enlargement/^
(a)
It is
fact
released or barred
s,
by
lapse of time.
(b)
(c)
65 (I).) Conveyancing Act, 1882,5. 11. Such owner includes (a) a person'
for sale or in receipt
,
of the ,inconie, (c) the representative of a deceased person and whether subject to incumbrances or not. (Conveyancing Act, 1881, q. 65 (2).)
'
(d)
(e)
(f)
liiJ.
s. s. s.
Hid. Hid.
65 65 65
(i).
(4). (6).
Digitized
by Microsoft
1156.
a person
An
estate at will
is
a possession of land
by
""
titled to a
time.
estate
this Title, a
'
Co.
'"'
55
a.
'
'
Tafkr'w. Ashe (1633) Vin. Ab. X, 396. Blunden v. Baugh (1634) Cro. Car., at p. 303, per Curiam.
really
may well be doubted whether a so-called 'estate at will' is an estate at all; but it is oftd;h described as such. No fealty is owed by the tenant in irespfict of it; an^ a rent reserved out of it, though it may be distrained for, is not rent service (Co. Litt. 57 b). No remainder can be limited on a so-called estate at will (Stafford's Case (1609) 8 Rep., at 75 a) ; and, neither before nor since the passing of the Juries Act, 1825, has such an estate been
[If
a qualification for jury service (32 Hen. VIII (1543) c. 6, s. 3 27 Eliz. (1585) c. 6, s. I; Juries Act, 1825, ss. i, 50, 52). the other hand, the doctriiie that a tenant is estopped from denying
On
1038 (iv)) applies to a tenancy at will {Morton Woods (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 658) ; and a tenant at will can take the reversion on his estate by release (Co. Litt. 270 b). It was the practice of some of the older writers (e. g. Blackstone) to class all copyhold estates as estates at will; but as the copyholder has long been protected by the King's Courts from arbitrary ejectment by his lord, this classification is manifestly untenable.]
his lord's title {ante,
V.
1157.
How
created
(i)
tenancy at will
is
created
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES AT WILL
lessee,W
less a
641
freehold
created)
C")
(a)
Litt.
s.
68.
Co.
(b)
Litt.
55
a.
Xj 396.
J.
Manwood,
Cadee's and Oliver's Gdse (1587) 3 Leon. 153. Bishop of Bath's Case (1605) 6 Rep., at 35 b,
Blamfordy. Blamfbrd {\6i^) 3 Bulst. iqo, Anderson v. M. R. Co. (1861) 3 E. & E. 614.
[If it is clear from the facts, that the parties intended to create a tenancy at will, the circumstance that a definite term of years is mentioned will not affect the character of the tenancy (^Morton v. Woods (1868) L. R. 3 Q. B. 658). On the other hand, an express tenancy "from year jtoyear" will not be converted into a tenancy at will, merely because it contains a power enabling the lessor to put an end to it at any time {Re Threlfall (1880) 16 Ch. D. 274). But the rule that an indefinite grant (not being of a freehold) creates an estate at will, does not hold against the Crown a Crown grant of that nature being void for uncertainty {Alton Woods Case (1600) i Rep., at 43 b).]
,
(ii)
by entry under
a lease for so
many
years as
153.
(iii)
by entry, under
a void
title,
at p.
Denn
Smith
v. Fearnside
V.
Wils- 176.
C. P. D. 10.
Digitized
by Microsoft
642
(iv):
LAW OF PROPERTY
by a holding over of a tenant, with the
acquiescence of the landlord, after the
expiry of the tenant's interest
Barham
v.
;]
a.
Bedford y. Jvbnson, ttbi suf. Sir Thomas Bowes" Case (1,670) V.\a. Ab. X, 400. Turner v. Bennett (1841) 11 L. J. Exch. 453.
[Acceptance of rent by the lessor, in either of the last two cases, any rate if the rent is accepted for any aliqiibt part of a year, converts the tenancy into a tenancy from year to year ( Wood v. Beard (1876) 3 Ex. D. 3,0; ante, 1132 (iv)).J
at
(v)
estate in
Blakeman (1622) 2 Rolle, 284. Barnes (1646) Sid., at p. 460, per Curiam. Holland y. Hatton {iGg-j) Carth. 414. Keech v. Hall (ij-jZ) i Dougl. 22.
Freeman
v.
[There appears at one time to have been a good deal of doubt, whether the relation of lessor and, tenant at will i? created between a mortgagee and a mortgagor by the mere occupation of the mortgaged premises by the latter without' any attornment or tenancy clause (see the remarks of Bijller, J., in Birch v. Wright (1786) I T. R., at p. 383, of Patteson, J., in Doe v. Williams (1836) 5 A. & E., at p. 297, of Best, C. J-i ^^ ^"^ v. Giles (1829) 5 Bing., at pp. 4267, and of Lord Denman, C. J,, in Doe v. Barton (1840) 11 A. & E., at p. 314.) On the other hand, it seems quite .cleac that, as against a stranger, the mortgagee may treat the mortgagor in possession as his tenant {Partridge v. Bere (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 604 ; Hitchman v. Walton (1838) 4 M. & W. 409; both approved in Doe v. Barton, ubi sup.). It would seem, then, that it is at the option of the mortgagee to treat the mortgagor in possession as a tenant at will or as a mere tenant at sufferance. But modern legislation, which has conferred, many rights of dealing with the property on the mortgagor, is certainly against the presumption that he is a wrong-doer ; and the statement in the text probably represents the modern view. It would seem, however, that^ in order
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES AT WILL
to constitute a tenancy at will, there
643
must be an actual recognition by the mortgagee of the mortgagor's holding (^Scobiev. Ctf///'r [1895] I Q. B. 375). And a mere covenant by the mortgagee that he will not take any of the profits of the land until default, does not, of itself, create a tenancy at will in the mortgagor (J'owsley v. Blakeman ubi sup.). In Sands to Thompson (1883) ^^ ^^- D., at p. 616, it was said by the Court, that a mortgagor who had paid off the mortgage without taking a reconveyance was a tenant at will to the Sed guare.] mortgagee.
(vi)
by the occupation by a
with
whom
v.
is
vested;
Tuck).
at
Pom/ret v. Lord Windsor (1752) 2 Ves. Sen., 481, per Hardwicke, C. Garrard y. Tuck (1849) 8 C. B., at p. 250. Melting V. Leak (1855) 16 C. B. 652.
p.
s.
[For the purposes of the Real Property Limitation Act, 1833, 3, the possession of the cestui que trust is the possession of the Apparently this is trustee (Garrard \. Tuck, ubi sup.., at p. 252). also the rule for other purposes (Geary v. Barecroft (1667) i Sid.
346).]
(vii)
by the admission
son
who
of the land,
v.
Stead (1824) 3 B.
& C,
at p.
485, per
Little-
Saunders
J.
Q. B.
220.
at will
and
(Mayhew
TVhite v.
v. Suttle
Digitized
by Microsoft
.644
Termination
LAW OF PROPERTY
A, tenancy at will
is
1158.
(i)
determined by
the
of tenancy
at will
Co.
55
b.
Nichollw.
McKaeg (1830) 10
B.
&
C. 721.
14.
Tomes
(ii)
v. Chamber'lain (i8'39) 5
M. & W.
lessor,
without
per Parke, B.
lessor
Litt.
[Unless the entry is for the purpose of doing an act which the is entitled to do without putting an end to the tenancy (Co.
55 b).J
(iii)
of which
the, lessor
has notice
Tinhorn Mailing
v. Souster v.
p.
(iv)
57 b, 62 b.
Scohie y. Collins
(1895)
Q,
B. 375.
[Even
if
the lease was expressly worded to hold to the lessee and of the lessor, the lessee's heir is a trespasser if
Outlawry of either party is said also to he enters (Litt. s. 82). determine the tenancy {Olanc^s Case (1602) 5 Rep; 116 b).]
(v)
lessor or the
lessee,
knowledge of the other party, and which shows an intention to put an end to the tenancy.
to the
Dimsdale
v. Isles
which comes
[The
at a rent,
hardships involved in this last rule, in the case of tenancies were so obvious, that the Courts at an early date attempted
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES AT WILL
to fay
ft
645
must be imposed must not determine his tenancy just before rent becomes due {Anon. (1505) Keilw. 65). But the tendency,' previously referred to ( 1132 (ii)) to treat any payment and
that certain reasonable restrictions
down,
upon
it,
acceptance of rent for an aliquot part of a year as evidence of a tenancy from year to year, which is manifest as early as Agard v. King (1600) Cro. Eliz. 775, has put an end to many of these refinements. The Apportionment Act, 1 870, by making rent accrue from day to day, has removed other difficulties. A summary of the old restrictions laid down to enforce 'reasonableness' will be found in Viner, Ab. X, pp. 406-7.J
1159.
No
notice to
minate a tenancy
determine
But the
cannot recover in
This
latter
rule has
eject
no
the
mortgagee
seeking to
1160.
If a rent certain
is
be
''^
of a tenancy
in arrear.
may
""'"'"^
Litt. s.
72.
Co.
Litt.
57
v.
b.
Anderson
M. ^.
Co.
(186 1)
E.
&
E. 614.
[Coke (Co.
II,
146)
s.
state, that if
is
the will
57 b) and, following him, Blackstone {Comm. the lessor impounds the distress on the land, See Distress for Rent Act, Sed quare. determined.
Litt.
1737,
10.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
646
Tenant at
mill entitled
to profits
LAW OF PROPERTY
A
tenant at will
is
1161.
Y. B. 12 Edw. IV (1473) Pasch. pi. 20, per Choke, R. V. Winter (1705) 2 Salk. 588, per Powel, J. Bennett v. Turner (1840) 10 L. J. Exch. 213. Trent v. Hunt (1853) 9 Exch. 14.
J.
And
emble-
1162.
tenant at will
whose tenancy
is
deter-
ments
entitled to
in
similar
application to a
same manner as a tenant for This rule has no circumstances.^ mortgagor occupying the mortgaged
68.
Co. Litt. 55. Landlord and Tenant Act, 1851, s. i. (b) Burden's and Withington's Case (1587) 2 Leon. 54. Keech v. Hall (1778) i Dougl., at p. 22, per Lord Mansfield, C. Moss V. Gallimore (1779) i Dougl., at p. 283, per Buller, J. Birch V. Wright (1786) i T. R., at p. 383, /^r Buller, J. Doe V. Giles (1829) 5 Bing.,-at p. 427, per Best, C. J.
J.
[The
tenant
at will
of a house
who
is
is
remove
goods
(Litt.
s.
69).]
May
bring
1163. of
xi
tenant at will
may
7eTmenT'^
Trespass W
and
Ejectment W
Book
II, Pt.
and
II,
814, 829),
if his pos-
Digitized
by Microsoft
ESTATES AT WILL
session of the land
is
647
(b)
Geanes v. Portman (1594) Cro. Eliz. Blunden v. Baugh (1634) Cro. Car. 305, /^r Jones, Berkeley, and Croke, JJ., quoting Spark v. Spark (1559-60), which was, however, a copyhold case. It seems that the lessor at will can
also
bring Ejectment {Geary v. Barecroft (1667) But there the tenant at will was a cestui que trust').
Sid.
346.
1164.
made un-
Uabiefoi
^"^""'"n
But he
not
liable, in
the absence of
[post. Sect. II,
71.
Co.
Litt.
57
a.
Harnett
v.
Maitland (1847) 16 M.
& W.
257.
1165.
It is
Alienation
anything
^^
^^^"'
Edw. IV (1482)
J.
Co.
Litt.
57
v.
a.
i
Brownl. 43.
5
I""-
Murphy
Ford (1855)
^- ^- ^- ^9-
determination, unless the lessor has notice of it (Carpenter v. Colins (1605) Yelv. 73; Pinhorn v. Souster (1853) ^ Exch. yb^-, ante,
1
158
V.
den
BlunIt was held in Rouse's Case (1587) Owen, 28 (iii).) Baugh (1634) Cro. Car., at p. 304; and Goody v. Carter
;
at will
(1847) 9 Q. B. 863, that a lease for years or at will by a tenant was binding on all persons but the original lessor.]
Y3
Digitized
by Microsoft
TITLE
Species
VIII
FUTURE
INTERESTS IN LAND
or
of
1166.
parties,
By
operation of law
by
act
of the
future
interests
an
estate
Such an
by way of reversion, or of
is
carries
though
that
it
cal difficulty
does not confer possession. It was, probably, the techniof admitting two independent seisins of the same land,
for the classification
;
was responsible
est^ate.
for
it
was impossible
to
But, as a mere estate for years does not carry thereon is, as we shall see (1167) for some purposes regarded as a corporeal hereditament, and, as such, carries Very early also was recognized another- class of interests, seisin. which conferred neither present enjoyment of the services nor present possession and the idea of the remainder, which was evidently approaching in Bfacton's day (Liber de Legibus Jnglia, fo. 18 b) through the medium of conditional limitations, was fully recognized by Littleton (ss. 716-719) at the end of the fifteenth
;
century; though the creation and operation of remainders were hfedged about, as will appear, by elaborate rules to prevent abeyance
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
or interruption of the
Litt.
seisin.
IN
LAND
649
378
a), a
admitted of their creation in favour of unascertained persons a practice which, though condemned by Littleton (s. 721), obviously, when recognized, added greatly to the powers of disposition enjoyed by landowners. Meanwhile, the freedom allowed by the Court of Chancery in dealing with the use, or beneficial interest in land held
by a fiduciary owner, permitted the creation of almost any future or contingent interests of an equitable kind ; and when these were, by the Statute of Uses, converted into legal estates, a third class of future interests (known as ' executory interests^') became possible. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the common law courts continued to give some effect to the strict rules which still bound the creation and operation of remainders ; but, as will be seen, during the nineteenth century, partly by statute, partly by judicial decision, remainders and executory interests have been very
largely assimilated, at
least so far as settlements dated after
it
1877
are concerned.
Nevertheless,
is
still
quite
between them.J
1167.
reversion
arises
by operation of law
is
Reversion
whenever
tion
a smaller
('particular') estate
created
by act of the
parties out
at
When
is
an estate of freehold,
is
an incorporeal
is
hereditament.
C")
When
(
an
for
some purposes
Litt.
s.
19; Co.
Litt.
22
(The
of the
smaller estate expressly limits or reserves the residue to himself or his heirs, is immaterial (ibid.); except that such a limitadon
Digitized
by Microsoft
650
LAW OF PROPERTY
now makes
the creator a purchaser for the purposes of the law of
s.
3).)
And
(c)
(Litt. s. 554, &c. The last is one Throgmorton v. Tracey (1555) Dyer, 124 b. of the best general authorities on the nature of a reversion). And no dower could' be claimed in respect of \t <jy Arcy y. Blake (1805) 2 Sch. & Lef., at p. 390, per Redesdale, C. (I)). (Apparently it lay both Walter v. Yalden [1902] 2 K. B. 304. in livery and in grant at the common law (Co. Litt. 48 b and 49 a; Anon. (1537) Dyer, 33 a; Doe v. Cole (1827) 7 B. & C.
it
therefore
common law
243-)
[The
is
interest retained
by the creator of an
called a
"
sfeignory."
rare exceptions ( 1044) a seignory created before the passing of the statute Qw'a
;
With
its
incidents are
now
of
conspicuous is the right to claim the possession of the land as an " escheat " ; should the tenant of the fee simple die intestate and without heirs. But this is little more than the right of every reversioner to claim the land on the expiry pf the particular estate.]
small practical value.
The most
Rights of
reversioner
1168.
The owner
of a reversion
is,
subject to ex-
of the land specified in 1 040, and to such other rights as may have been expressly reserved, excepted,
or otherwise created, by the instrument under
his reversion arises.
which
[The owner of a reversion is, by his very definition, the ' lord of the owner of the particular estate, and, as such, entitled to the incidents of lordship.]
Declaration
1169.
The owner
of
title
term of years in land, whether absolute or subject to any incumbrances, estates, rights, or interests, vested
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
or contingent, and
a
IN
LAND
651
power of disposing of such an interest for his own benefit, may apply to the Chancery Division of the
High Court
title
;
for a declaration
and such declaration may be granted under the conditions prescribed by, and will be valid to the
extent described
in,
1862.
Declaration of Tide Act, 1862,
ss.
i,
48.
1 1
70.
The owner
of a reversion
may by deed
or
Alienation iy
reversioner
[This
lished in the
common
Digitized
by Microsoft
6sz
Statute of
LAW OF PROPERTY
Uses had dealt a further blow at the theory of feudal it was soon afterwards held {Heyward's Case (1595) 2 Rep. 34 b) that a conveyance which operated by virtue of'the statute passed the re\ersion without attornment of -the tenant. Finally,
allegiance; for
1705, a statute (4 & 5 Anne,c. 16, s.,9) abolished the necessity attornment in all " grants aiid conveyances " of reversions. Apparently, attornment still remains necessary where the reversioner comes in. by hostile title {Harris y. Booker (1827) 4 Bing. 96). Any act which recognizes the position of the new reversioner will be sufficient as an attornment [Gladman v. Plumer (1845) 15 The attornment of the tenant to a stranger, L J. Q. B. 79). which formerly worked serious detriment to the reversioner, no longer has any tffect (iDistress for Rent Act, 1737, s. 11) ; except (possibly) as a disclaimer involving forfeiture of the tenant's interest. A tenan,t is protected if, he pays rent to the former reversioner without notice of the transfer of the reversion (4 & 5 Anne, c. 16, s. 10). With regard to the form by which a reversion could be transferred, it seems quisle clear that, subject to the necessity for attornment, a i'eversion, whether a true 'reversion on a freehold estate, or a so-called r/eversion on a term of years, could, by Littleton's day, be transferred by deed of grant (Litt. ss. 567-8).]
in
for
Possibility
1171.
possibility
of reverter
arises in
the donor
or his heirs
upon
on
Such
a possibility
may be
devised, or
.(a)
(b)
Simpson v. Simpson (i;838) 4 Bing. N. C. 333. Bemberton v. Barnes [1899],! Ch. 544. Wills Act. 1837,8. 3. ^^., Real Property Act, 1845, s. 6. Pemberion v. Barnes, ubi sup.
[A fee simple conditional iwilL merge in the possibility of reverter expectant upon it {Simpson v. Simpson^ ubi sup.). difficulty arises where there is a limitation of a contingent remainder in fee simple.
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
IN
LAND
653
According to Coke (Co. Litt. 342 b) and Blackstone (Csotot. II, 107), the fee is in abeyance so long as the contingency may, but does not take effect. Clearly, however, some interest remains in the donor; but whether a reversion or some other species of interest may be doubted, though Fearne {Contingent Remainders, pp. 359364) takes the former view. The point does not, at the present day, seem to be of practical importance. The effect of the Contingent Remainders Act, 1877, on such a case should, however, be
noted,]
1172.
[post,
1
Subject
to
the
Remainders
vested
and the Rule against Double Possi bilities [post, 1179), a remainder is created whenever an estate of freehold or copyhold W is limited
181
n.),
and
contingent
to a person other
than the
C")
settlor, to
take effect in
possession
on the expiry
of a preceding estate of
the
same convey-
If such remainder
is
limited absolutely to an
existing and ascertained person or persons, it is said if it is limited in favour of an unto be " vested "
;
mainder
(a)
is
said to be vested.
the difficulties of the theory, that copyhold remainders have been recognized almost ever since the recognition of copyhold tenure itself by the King's Courts.
(Brown's Cj^ (1581) 4 Rep., atzzb ; Fitchy. Stuckley (1594) On the other hand, a common law term of years 23 a). to take effect in futuro, though it may be loosely styled a reibid.
Digitized
by Microsoft
654
LAW OF PROPERTY
mainder, cannot be anything more dian an interesse termini; because the person in whose favour it is limited cannot enter under
it
of the particular estate {Corbet y. Stone (1653) T. Raym., at p. 151). In Geary v. Barecroft (1665) i Sid. 346, it was said by the Court, that even an estate at will could be limited by way of remainder. (b) It is important to notice, that the remainder must contemplate
until the expiry
Sir
that
liked
(c)
(d)
(e)
(1550)
Plowd. zi).)
(f)
Rep. 66
b.
Freehold
1173.
Any
mence
than
as
re-
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
mainder
as
IN
LAND
655
upon
a particular
estate
of freehold, or
an executory
interest
{post,
1183)
is
void ab
initio.
HeHer v. Okeden (1560) Moo. 14. Barwick's Case (1597) 5 Rep. 93 b (3rd resolution). Pay's Case (1601) Cro. Eliz. 878.
[There seems to be no corresponding rule with regard to copyholds or estates for years. But the doctrine extends to limitations of existing future interests of freehold {WrotesleyY. Adams (1559) Plowd. 187; Buckler v. Harvey (1594) Cro. Eliz. 450).]
1 1
74.
No
take No
remain"
efFect
(")
,
but alternative
liiliited,
^^'' ''(''^,
fee simple
may be
manner
Litt.
that only
Co.
8 a.
Blackstone,
Comm.
Musgrave
v.
[This
is
greatest estate
the logical result of the fact, that a fee simple is the known to the law, combined with the working of
by subinfeudation.
left
Having
to give.
The
to determinable fees
at p.
{E. of Stafford v.
180).
Loddington
v.
Kime (1694)
White's and
HindWs
limitation to
for life,
remainder to
he should survive A,
if not, to
in
fee
simple,
would be
a perfectly
But any attempt to provide C, after it had once vested in a remainder; though it might be good if effected
good
limitation.
{jfost^
1182).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
656
Cross re-
LAW OF PROPERTY
Where
there
is
1175.
a single devise
mainders
as
tenants in
W of common
to time,
land to
in tail,
all
dy-
ing without
issue, then,
from time
on the
(if
as tenants in
com-
mon) an
estate tail in
The
;
(*=)
rule has no
except that
There
ties
is
no implication
Case
of separate properv.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(1572) Dyer, 330b; Gilbert (1621) Cro. Jac. 655). Anon. (1570) Dyer, 303 b. Huntley's Case (1572) ibid. 326. Coley. Levingston (1672) i Vent. 224. Doe V. Dorvell (1794) 5 T. R. 518. West V. Errissey (1726) 2 P. Wms. 349 (H. L.). Twisden v. Lock (1768) z Amb. 663.
i^Clacbe's
Witty
[In Cole V. Levingston it is suggested that there cannot be cross remainders by implication where the devise is to more than two persons. But this doctrine has since been disapproved {Mannaford
Hamaford (1871) L. R. 7 Q. B. 119 ; Re Ridge's Trusts (1872) L. R. 7 Ch. App., at p. 668, per James, L. J. Obviously there can be no cross remainders in fee simple (see 1173).]
V.
Cross
1176.
Where
there
is
.
a single devise to
two
.
or
a
remainders
for
life
more
persons as tenants in
common
,.^
lire,
lor
with
gift over
all
of them,
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
IN
LAND
^si
then, from time to time, on the death of any of such persons, the survivor or survivors (if any) will take
common)
an
of such deceased person, before the gift over takes effect.W The rule has no application to limitations inter vivos; except that it
has been applied to marriage articles.
(a)
Ashley
Parfitt V.
(b)
Ashley (1833) 6 Sim. 358. Member (1867) L. R. 4 Eq. 443. Twisden v. Lock, ubi sup.
v.
[The
Re
distinction
between
1 1
77.
limitation
which
is
Remainders
""'^^'"^"""'3
made by deed J
or
hmttattons
by testament, and whether by common law conveyance or by instrument operating under the Statute of
Uses, be so construed; even though
ceivably be construed
{post,
I
it
might conlimitation
as
an
executory
183).
Cbudleigh's Case (1589) I Rep. 113 b. Purefoy v. Rogers (1671) 2 Wms. Saand. 380. Cole V. Sewell (1843) 4 Dr. & W. i, per Sugden, C.
White
2
[This is one of the means before referred to ( 1165, '^)-) ^7 which the common law courts, subsequently to the passing of the
Statute of Uses, succeeded in keeping alive the technical rules affecting
popularity of executory
limitations created after
has
little
practical effect
if these
upon
may
cannot take effect as remainyet take effect as executory interests (Contingent Re-
Digitized
by Microsoft
6s8
LAW OF PROPERTY
But, though it is rarely that a limitation is mainders Act, 1877). capable of being construed both as a remainder and as an executory interest, there is one important species of limitation, viz. gifts to a class, which causes difficulty, and in respect of which, especially if
made
there
before
is
is
important.
Thus,
if
a devise of land to
of
his
children
children as shall attain 21, the limitation in favour of A's must be construed as a remainder ; and, consequently, only
those children who' attain 21 before A's death will be entitled, subject to the Contingent Remainders Act, 1877, to take under it
{Festing v.
Men
(1843) 12
M. & W.
279).
And
limitations by
way of use
same way
as
common
law limitations ( Tafnerv. Merlott (1739) Willes, at p. 180, But if the words used by the settlor are inconsistent per Curiam). with the creation of a true remainder, e. g. if they contemplate a defeasance of the prior estate, or if the gift is " to all the children of A who shall attain 21, whether in A's lifetime or afterwards," then the gift will be construed as' an executory limitation, and, therefore, all A's children will be admitted to share, whenever born {Re Lechmere and Lloyd (1881) 18 Ch. D. 524; Blackman v. Fysh [1892] 3 Ch. 209). Even with regard to limitations created after 1877, the rule may still have some importance, e. g. a limitation to A for life, and after his death to the first of his sons who attains 24. As an executory limitation, this would be clearly bad ; but it might take efi^ect as a remainder if, in fact, A left a son who had attained 24 in his lifetime (Re Wrightson [1904] 2 Ch. 75). Finally, it' should be noted, that a devise which, originally, was clearly framed as a remainder, may, according to the circumstances existing at the Thus, if testator's death, take effect as an executory limitation. there is a devise to A for life (or in tail) with remainder to the" first son of B who shall attain 21, in fee, and A dies (without issue) in the lifetime of the testator, then, if at the testator's death B has no son who has attained 21, the devise to such person becomes executory {Pafs Case (1601) Cro. Eliz. 878 ; Hopkins v, Hopkins (1734) Ca. temp. Talbot, 44).]
Rule
in
11
^
78.
When a
Cate
^^
in the.
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
same land
person to
to the heirs, or heirs
IN
LAND
is
659
whom the
former freehold
limited,
or, in a devise,
by words signifying
a similar inten-
tion,
such heirs.W
and a codicil
regarded
(a)
a separate estate upon For the purposes of this , a testament thereto, ('^ and a settlement and an
appointment under
as parts
are
(1856) 26 L. J. Ch. 266; Bakery. Parson (1872) 42 L.J. Ch. 228). A limitation of an existing term of years to A, with a gift over, whether by lease or assignment, vests the whole term and so the rule has no application in such a case. And in him a bequest of a term of years to A, with a gift over in favour of his heirs, also gives A the whole term (^Kinch v. Ward (1825)
;
Sim.
&
S.
409).
new term of
v.
Tafner
Merlott
(b)
180). In theory, the first and second estates do not unite so long as there and, consequently, the latter, even is an intervening estate ;
at p.
(1739) Willes,
(c)
though contingent, is not destroyed, but takes effect as though the had never operated {Lewis Bowles' Case (161 5) 11 Rep. 79 b). It seems that if any intervening limitations are void for remoteness, the Rule in Shelley's Case will not prevent the subsequent limitations being bad (^^ Mortimer [1905] 2 Ch. 502). The word "estate" is here used strictly. The rule will not operate to unite a legal estate and an equitable interest (Baker v.
rule
interests,
of a freehold
This
is
the
most
difficult
Apparently, in a deed, no word other than the word "heirs" will cause the rule to operate ; sinc^ no other words were, at the common law, sufficient to limit an estate of inheritance. On the other hand, the word "heirs" in a deed will not necessarily
bring in the rule
;
if it is
is
using the
word
Digitized
by Microsoft
6o
LAW OF PROPERTY
merely to indicate
173).
tation,
specific persons (^Evans v. Evans [1892] 2 Ch, But, in a devise, owing to the greater laxity of interpre-
jthe heirs
any expressions indicating an intention to limit an estate to of the first taker will be sufiicient to bring in the rule {Roddy V. Fitzgerald (1857) 6 H. L. C. 823, approved in Fan Grutten v. Foxwell [1897] A. C. 658); while, on the other hand, the use of the word "heir" {Archer's Case (1597) i Rep. 63 b; Fuller v. Chamier (1866) L. R.y2 Eq. 682) or even "'heirs" {Goodtitle v. Herring (1801) i East, 264, recognized in Jesson v. Wright (1820) 2 Bligh, at p. 18) wiH not have that effect ; if it is clear from the context that the testator intended by these expressions to indicate specific persons, and not successors
in general.
^
(e)
(f)
(s)
(1579) i Rep. 219. Perrin v. Blake {ijSi)) i W. Bl. 672; (1772) 4 Burr. 2579. Hayes v. Foorde (1770) 2 W. Bl. 698. Jesson v. Wright, ubi sup.
Shelley's Case
[The mere
operate,
is
Van
it is
fact that the settlor intends that the rule shall not immaterial {Thong v. Bedford (1815) 4 M. S. 362; Grutten v. Foxwell^ ubi sup., at p. 684, per Lord Davey). But
&
sometimes very
difficult to distinguish
the rule shall not operate, which does not prevent the application of the rule, and an intention to indicate specific persons, which does.
It
{Macnamara
v. Dillon
(1883) II
Ir.
R. (Ch.) 29).]
So-called ^^
1179.
Where,
in a
conveyance
'Lsslbiiities"
^ limitation
life,
followed by a limitation
issue (as
any
tation
is void.''')
Where
effect
of an
first
have the
tail
of conferring on the
it
taker an estate
^yould,
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
in whose favour the remainder them only {cy-pres)y>
(a)
IN
is
LAND
66i
Hmited, and to
Re Bullock [1915]
Whithy
v.
(b)
I Ch. 493. Mitchell (1890) 44 Ch. D. 85. (This decision shows (i) that limitations effected by way of use are subject to the rule, equally with common law remainders, (ii) that a settlement creating a special power of appointment and an appointment under it are, for
Re Nash f 1 9 1 o]
1 Ch. i . (This case decides that successive equitable limitations are also subject to the rule.) Re Clarke's Settlement [1916] i Ch. 467 (copyholds).
(c)
(In this p. 446. R., states the cy-pres doctrine as if it were applicable where the void limitation is only for life. Sed quare.)
M.
(This case shows, that if no of recognized character would answer the description in the text, it is not possible to save the limitation by implying an estate tail of a novel character. Thus, a devise to the eldest (unborn) son of A, with remainder to his daughters successively in tail, would not confer upon A's son an estate in tail female ; because such an estate does not descend to daughters successively.)
[This rule, sometimes called the " Rule Against Double Possibilities," which has recently been the subject of much discussion in the cases above quoted, was probably, in its origin, one of the many checks devised by the Courts to prevent the creation of an unbarIt is not applicable to limitations of chattels perrable estate tail. Neither is it applicable to sonal (Re Bowles [1902] 2 Ch. 650). vested remainders; for no remainder limited to an unborn person It is probably applicable to executory limcan possibly be vested. It is but there seems to have been no case on the point. itations quite independent of the Rule against Perpetuities (^Re Nash, ubi sup., at p. "Jtper Farwell, L. J.); and is said to be much older than that Care must be taken to distinguish it from the Rule in Shelley's Rule. Case; which has no application when the second limitation is to a
-,
The Rule against Double Possibilities specific person or persons. only applies where the first limitation is for life ; because a first limitation in tail would enable the first taker to get rid of all remainders by barring the entail, while there can be no remainder on For the purposes of the rule, the first taker is not a fee simple.
deemed to be ' unborn,' if he is en ventre sa mere when the settlement comes into operation (^Re Wilmer's Trusts [1903] 2 Ch. 41 1).]
Digitized
by Microsoft
662
Future cor-
LAW OF PROPERTY
No
remainder can be limited to a corporaof a person not
1180.
hein'\f"
unbornperson
bom when
[There is not much authority on this point but the dicta in the two authorities quoted are accepted as law. Obviously, there could be no limitation of a present interest or of a vested remainder in
either case
;
but
it is
similar object, if
petuities,
it
was
might be good,
g. a devise to
in fee, but if
(a
who
Rule against
1181.
"'by way of remainder W or of executory limitation, are subject to the Rule against Perpetuities. C")
(a)
Re Frost (1889) 4.3 Ch. D. 246. Re Ashforth [1905] I Ch.' 535Whitby v. Von Liiedecke [1906] I Ch.
CadeU
v.
783.
(b)
Palmer (1833)
I CI.
&
F. 372.
[This
is
Perpetuities, which, as a restriction affecting limitations of all kinds of property, will be found fully stated in a, later Section (XV). It is
enough here to say, that the Rule renders void any limitation which might permit a claim to property to arise after the expiry of lives in being at the date of the limitation and a further period of twentyone years. If no life interests are involved, the limitation is restricted in operation to an absolute period of twenty-one years from its date. There is the usual allowance for gestation where gestation
actually exists.
The
reason
why
and
the rule
after
is
alluded
to at this
stage
versy,
is
that,
quite, recently,
it has been established, so far as Courts of First Instance can lay down a rule of law, that it applies to contingent remainders equally with executory interests, though, historically speaking, it was evolved in connection with the latter class of in-
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
terests.
IN
LAND
663
The cause of the extension of the Rule is probably to be found in the statutory changes made during the nineteenth century, by which the former liability of a contingent remainder to be defeated by the determination of the particular estate, has been largely diminished. Of course, no reversion or vested remainder can be
void for perpetuity.]
1182.
Abeyance
'J
or copyhold,
taking
effect,
'"""
forfeiture,
estate, in
surrender, or
such
And
a contin-
gent remainder
provided that
it
created
after
conforms
capable of taking
as
an
executory
interest,
previous
particular
determination
estate. C")
(a)
(by
any
means)
of the
(b)
Real Property Act, 1845, s. 8. Pickersgillv. Grey (i86i) 30 Beav. 352 (copyhold). (The Act applies to hereditaContingent Remainders Act, 1877. ments of any tenure ; and, apparently, even copyholds were, prior to the Act, liable to destruction on the natural Mure of the particular estate {Habergham v. Fitieent (1793) 2 Ves. Jr., at
p. T-ll.per Buller, J.).)
.
[Apart from statute, a contingent remainder which was not ready to vest eo instanti that the particular estate determined, *' And there may still be cases in failed," i.e., became extinct.
Mien
(1843)
I2
1183.
ever,
An
arises
when-
Executory
"""'""
Digitized
by Microsoft
664
in
LAW OF PROPERTY
at
some manner
future
that a
remainder
is
not created.
to
must be expressed
lent
be made by
way of use
or equiva-
may be
expressed directly in
defeasance
of
Leon. 64 (said to be the earliest case in which fee simple by an executory, limitation was
Eliz.
recognized).
204.
Jac.
590.
down
the
important rule, that an executory interest, except where it followed on an estate tail, could not be destroyed by a common recovery.) (This case is so badly Scatterwood v. Edge (1697) i Salk. 229.
reported, that
it is
difficult to
But
Baker
v.
171.
[Executory interests arose out of the practice of the Court of Chancery, which, prior to the Statute of Uses, treated future dispositions of the profits of land, though not conforming to the rules affecting common law remainders, as binding in Equity on the conscience of the legal owner who had accepted his estate with knowledge of the dispositions, or was otherwise in conscience bound by them. On the passing of the Statute of Uses, such dispositions, where the necessary conditions were present, became binding also Thus, for the first time, it bein law, i. e. independently of notice. came possible to limit future legal interests in land regardless of the technical rules of the common law on the subject of remainders. For
instance, it became lawful (a) to limit future interests independently of a particular estate (" springing uses "), (b) to limit such interests in defeasance of preceding interests ("shifting uses "). In the former case, the seisin remained in the settlor or the trustees until the future
in the latter it shifted away from the previous taker, in had already been executed by the statute. The reason why the formality of expressing the use was dispensed with in executory devises was (probabjy) that, all devises of land before 1540 (Statute of Wills) being, apart from local custom, merely equitable in their effect, it was assumed, after devises became legal, that the
use arose
it
whom
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
IN
LAND
665
by the Statute of Uses {Ferry v. Phelips (1790) i Ves. Jr., at p. 255, per Thurlow, C). But the recognition of executory devises of estates for years, which, after some hesitation, was accorded before the end of the seventeenth century {Eyres v. Faulkland (1697) i Salic. 231), though convenient, was less logical for the Statute of Uses can have no application to such dispositions, inasmuch as neither the testator nor his personal representatives qr legatees can be "seised" of an estate for years. It seems, however, also to be well settled,
;
which the settlor is seised in fee or for life {Boddington v. Abernethy (1826) 5 B. & C. 776) though it may be that the lord cannot be compelled to accept a surrender by which future uses are left to be executed under a power of appointment {Flack v. Downing College As to the distinction between execu(1853) 13 C. B. 945).
;
tory interests and remainders, see ante, 11 77. As above stated ( 1 181, n.), the Rule against Perpetuities applies to executory
limitations
(for which, indeed,
it
was
specially introduced)
and
left
no
seisin out^
of which
To nveet this difficulty, the the subsequent use could be executed. fiction of a scintilla juris in the trustee was invented; but this fiction has been rendered unnecessary (if it ever was necessary) by the
provisions of the
Law
of Property
Amendment
Act, i860,
s.
7.
1184.
since
Where,
in
testanfent
made
or
revived
Failure of
1837, there is an executory devise over on failure of the issue of any person (whether such
person
takes
"'"'
an
interest
in
the
construed
185) to mean a failure of issue in the lifetime or at the death of such person, and not an
Digitized
by Microsoft
666
LAW OF PROPERTY
by reason of such
tail
in the land, or of a
aristail
preceding
gift being,
person or
issue, a
appre-
pears
by the
testament. W
There
is
no such
(a )
Wills Act, 1837, s. 29. (The wording of the Act is confined to "issue" ; but there is a disposition to extend the rule to other See Re Edexpressions, e. g. "male issue " and "children."
Fisher v. l^igg
(b)
Ch. 644; Re Booth [1900] i Ch. 768.), (1700) i P. Wms., at p. i^,per Gould, J. Bamfield v. Popham (1702) ibid., at p. 57, per Powell, J. Morgan v. Morgan (1870) L. R. lo Eq. 99.
wards [1894]
[Before the passing of the Wills Act, 1837, the rule was to treat such limitation as referring to an indefinite failure of issue, and, therefore, as creating an estate tail in the person the failure of whose issue was contemplated, unless such person's interest was greater than an
estate tail {Sonday's Case
(161
1)
sup.; Bamfieldw. Popham, ubi slip.; Idle v. Cook (1705) I P. 70). Obviously, this construction was far from satisfactory to the execu-
Wms.
tory devisees
tail
inasmuch as the previous taker might bar the estate ; and destroy their chances. But it seems to be applied, even now, to limitations by deed {Morgan v. Morgan., ubi sup., Sf/hext, however, the estate already limited to the previous taker was, ap.
Issue attain'"^
1185.
Where
a person
is
^^
terminable on
life,
or for term of
with an exall
or
any of his
issue,
whether within or
at
any specified
Digitized
by Microsoft
FUTURE INTERESTS
IN
LAND
667
period or not, that executory limitation will be or become void and incapable of taking effect, if and as soon as there is living any issue who has attained
the age of twenty-one years, of the class on default or failure whereof the limitation over was to take
effect.
is
This rule only applies when the limitation contained in an instrument coming into operation
after 31st
December, 1882.
Conveyancing Act, i88z,
s.
10.
W.
[The section applies to equitable interests (Re Shrubb [19 10] N. 143). Quare : can an executory limitation of the legal
be contained
in
?]
1186.
Generally
speaking,
in
the
absence
oi
Rights of
"Z"are
interest
over.
But
(i)
apply for
an
injunction
in
respect
of
on the land by
or a stranger;
Jefferson v. Jefferson (1682) Lev. 130. Bedingfield V. Onslow (1685) ibid. 209. Seagram v. Knight (1867) L. R. 2 Ch. App., at p. 632.
have existed
It is said
(vhen the
vt^aste
trespass committed.
Digitized
by Microsoft
668
LAW OF PROPERTY
(Co. Litt. 53 b) that a tenant in tail after possibility could not bring But it is doubtful whether this disability the old Action of Waste. For the various prevents him bringing the modern Action of Case. kinds of action open to the remainderman, see ante, 1077 note.]
(ii)
and the owner of a contingent remainder in fee/"") though he cannot obtain damages
for waste,
may
Dayrellv. ChaMpness (1700) i Eq. Ca. Ab. 400. Millineux v. Powell (1730) i P. Wms., at p. 268 (n).
[It
seems doubtful whether a remainderman for life has a right (1792) i Ves. Jr. 479).]
Garth
v. Cotton
v.
Williams
(iii)
(1750) i Ves. Sr. 545. D. of Bolton (1784) ibid., per Lord King, C.
a person in
whose favour
a valid executory
is
limited
may
strain the
profits received.
Wright (i860) 2
i
Peters (1863)
Claxton V.
[In two reported cases [Aspinwallv. Leigh (1690) 2 Vern. 217; Claxton (1690) ibid. 152) owners of future interests
to enter
were allowed
for their
own
of the tenants for life in possession. But one of these decisions, at least, was given during a vacancy of the Great Seal ; and neither is likely to be followed at the present day.]
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft
Digitized
by Microsoft