« AnteriorContinuar »
SCIRE FACIAS. See Joint-STOCK COMPANIES Act.
brought on a judgment, but within twenty years after the cause of such action or recovery of such judgment, only applies to actions begun by summons and plaint, and not to writs of revivor or proceedings by suggestion. Q. B. Johnston v. Bell 526
REFERENCE TO MASTER TO
ASCERTAIN DAMAGES. An application for a reference to the
Master to ascertain the amount of final judgment, under Common Law Procedure Act 1856, must be made on notice, or a conditional order only will be granted. E. Honohan v. Ahern
RENT. See ATTACAMENT.
RENTAL See LANDLORD AND TENANT.
RENT, ABATEMENT OF See LANDLORD AND TENANT.
REPORT, WHEN ACTIONABLE.
SEIZURE IN EXECUTION. Where a creditor, having seized the
goods of a principal debtor in execution, afterwards caused a return of nulla bona to be made on the writ of execution, and forbore to sell the goods, though called on by the surety so to do, and then issued a ca. sa. against the person of the surety, marked for the full sum due, without deducting therefrom the value of the goods so seized :-Held, that this amounted to a voluntary abandonment of the seizure; and that, as the seizure and subsequent abandonment of the goods of the principal operated in Equity as a discharge pro tanto of the surety (who was entitled to call upon the creditor to proceed and sell the goods, and to give him credit for the amount realised by such sale), the value of those goods was an equitable deduction, to which the plaintiff should be entitled under the statute of 6 Anne, c. 7.
Held also, that an action at Common Law lies for maliciously, and without probable cause, overmarking the writ of execution under which the debtor is arrested, as the statute of Anne provides no specific remedy for that case, but only for the case of the omission to deliver a proper certificate, or for overcharging the debtor in that certificate.
Plaintiff, having deposed in evidence that he wrote a letter about his affairs to the defendant, calling on him to sell the goods so seized, and that he, or somebody for him, posted it; and evidence having been given that the defendant had held a conversation with a third person, in which he stated that he had been so called upon, and during which
REPUTATION, FAMILY. See CIVIL-BILL EJECTMENT.
REQUEST, NECESSITY OF. See PLEADING, 3.
RETAINER. See ATTORNEY.
REVERSION, NECESSARY TO
RIGHT OF ENTRY. See EJECTMENT, 1.
RULES. See PRACTICE, 5, 14.
RULE TO PROCEED TO TRIAL.
See PROCEDURE ACT.
SALE BY SAMPLE. See PLEADING, 4.
conversation he held a letter in his Letters written by the defendant's hand, which he did not read, but solicitor, subsequently to the arrest of which he said he had received on the plaintiff, with reference thereto, the subject :-Held, sufficient ground were Held properly receivable as evito admit secondary evidence of the dence of malice in the arrest; as the letter written by plaintiff (a notice animus of the defendant is to be to produce having been served). inferred by the jury ex antecedentibus
et consequentibus. The decree in a Chancery petition matter, in which the plaintiff was
An incomplete finding of the jury petitioner, and the defendant was a
on one of the issues in the case was respondent as public officer of a Held immaterial, as the admissions on Bank, and in which matter the
the record and the findings on the amount of the value of the goods
other issues showed a sufficient cause seized by defendant, and the plain
of action, although, if the former had tiff's right to that amount, as
stood alone, there should have been a equitable deduction, had been deter
venire de novo. E. Spencer v. Thompmined, being offered in evidence, was
537 objected to, as obtained against the
SERVICE. defendant in autre droit.- Held, that
See Civil-BILL EJECTMENT. such proceeding was not res inter alios
MARKING JUDGMENT. acta, but was admissible against de
PRACTICE, 8, 16. fendant, as he bad, prima facie, a complete control over the suit as a
SETTING ASIDE DEFENCE. party thereto (no evidence of limited
See PLEADING, 1. control having been given). Held also, that this decree, although
SETTING ASIDE PROCEEDINGS.
See JUDGMENT. made subsequently to the arrest complained of, was evidence at least to
SEVERAL ISSUES, prove the value of the goods, which had been ascertained thereby; and
See LIBEL, 4. that, 'if admissible for any purpose,
SIDE-BAR RULE. the exception taken to its reception, being general, should be overruled.
See PRACTICE, 9. Semble also, that the decree would
SLANDER. be admissible as the decision of a
See LIBEL, 1. Court of competent jurisdiction, that a right to an equitable deduction had Action for a libel published by the deexisted at the time the execution
fendant in a newspaper. issued.
The defendant pleaded that he was Semble.-A party maliciously ar
a guardian of the poor of a certain
union, and at a meeting of the board resting another for more than is due cannot be held to have probable cause,
of guardians of that union a discussion
arose in reference to the plaintiff, and by reason of his mere belief that he is warranted by law in so doing.
that speeches were made by several
of the guardians, including the deThe relinquishing of the execution fendant, and by the plaintiff on his against the goods of the principal, own behalf, and that the defendant and the issuing of execution against spoke in discharge of a public duty, the person of the surety, with the without malice, &c.; also, that in motive of serving the principal by order to assist the newspaper repor. injuring the surety, is evidence for ter, who attended for the purpose of the jury on the question of malice. reporting the proceedings, to publish
a correct account of them, he handed, 11 Anne, c. 2, s. 8
19 G. 2, c.
26 G. 3, c.
33, s 15. English Marriage
Act 155, 167
15 & 16 G. 3, c. 27, s. 3
55 57 G.3, c. 51. Newfoundland 168
58 G. 3, c. 39
1 G. 4, c. 41
4 G. 4, c. 99, ss. 21 and 25. Goulburn's
146 1 & 2 Vic., c. 56, s. 93. Irish Poor Law
7 & 8 Vic., c. 81. Dominica Law for
SUMMONS AND PLAINT.
See PRACTICE, 11.
73, 81, 86
See PRACTICE, 5.
255 TITHE RENTCHARGE.
An applotment was made under the
Tithe Composition Act, on certain
lands, of which Lord H. was entitled
to the first estate of inheritance. The
defendants, for the purposes of their
Railway, took a conveyance of the
suant to the 1 & 2 Vic., c. 109, had
been reduced one-fourth.-Held, that
the rentcharge, imposed by 1 & 2 Vic.,
being substituted in lieu of the charge
mained a charge thereon, and that
the lands being occupied as a Railway
made no ground of exemption. Q. B.
section 22 of the Chancery Regulation
See LIBEL, 1.
To an action of trespass, for breaking
and entering the close of the plaintiff,
and seizing and taking and carrying
away and converting the goods and
pleaded a justification ;-because of
plaintiff to the defendant as his land-
lord, he, the defendant, entered and
distrained the goods and chattels as
and for a distress for the rent due,
according to the form of the statute in such case made and provided ;' quæ sunt eadem, &c.—Held, on demurrer to this defence, per LEFROY, C. J., and PERRIN, J., that such general pleading was good ; and per CRAMPTON and MOORE, JJ., that the requirements of the statute 9 & 10 Vic., c. 111, should have been specifically set out in the defence. Q. B. Spratt v. Murphy
TRIAL, WITNESS UNABLE TO
a codicil, reciting that he had purchased certain freeholds, and had converted leaseholds into freeholds, he specifically devised the same, and such as he should thereafter purchase, upon the same trusts. At the time of making this will and codicil, he was seised under a lease of an estate for lives.—Held, that that leasehold interest did not pass to the trustees under the will and codicil, but descended upon the heir-at-law of the testator.
A, in his lifetime, planted timber trees on said leasehold estate, and duly registered the same, and died without having felled the timber, and was succeeded by B, his heir-at-law, the surviving life in the lease. After the death of B, and within twelve months after his decease, his personal representatives cut the timber.
Held, that at Common Law, the timber was part of the inheritance until severed; but that when severed, it became a mere chattel; and that under the Timber Acts, the tenant not having felled said trees during the existence of the lease, they remained part of the inheritance, and descended with the land. Q. B. Alexander v. Godley
VACATION. See PRACTICE, 5.
VENUE. See POOR-LAW Act.
VERDICT, GENERAL. See INDICTMENT.
VERBAL AUTHORITY. See ATTORNEY.
VOTER. See CounTI REGISTRY.
WARRANT. See POOR-RATE.
WILL, CONSTRUCTION OF. 1. A, by his will, dated the 21st of No
vember 1832, reciting that he was seised in fee-simple of certain estates, and also of the reversion in fee in certain settled estates, and that he was desirous of settling and disposing of his unsettled and other estates, devised to trustees all the lands of which he was seised in fee-simple, and also his reversion in fee of his settled estates, and all his estate and interest in said estates respectively, upon certain trusts therein named ; and by
2. IA testator by his will appoints execu
tors, and empowers them “ to act as such, and that they will dispose and manage the effects in manner and form following :-First, I recommend my lawful debts to be paid, as my lawful debts to be recovered.” He then devised his real estates among his sons in certain portions, each son to become entitled to possession upon his marriage, subject to a proportionate share of the debts and charges affecting the real estate.—Held, that the executors took the legal estate only during the interval between the death of the testator and the happening of the event upon which each son was to become entitled to possession ; and that the words of the will did not give the executors a