Lords of the Committee that a complete change in the constitution of the Royal Court was necessary, yet, as the suspension of new elections of Jurats would not effect any improvements in the constitution of that Court, Her Majesty was advised to permit such resignations, coupled with directions that the same privileges and distinctions that the retiring Jurats had enjoyed as Jurats should continue to them during their lives, and ordering new elections to supply the place of such vacancies. In the matter of the Jersey Jurats CONSTRUCTION-Of Sec. 25 of the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, relating to exten- sion of English Letters Patent, where a patent has previously been taken out in a foreign country for a similar invention. In re Poole's Patent
See BILL OF LADING, 2; BOUNDARIES; CODE CIVIL; COLONIAL LAW, 5; DEBenture Bond.
CONTEMPT OF COURT-1. An Order suspending an Attorney and Barrister of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia from practising in that Court, for having addressed a letter to the Chief Justice, reflecting on the Judges and the administration of justice generally in the Court, discharged by the Judicial Committee, as it substituted a penalty and mode of punishment which was not the appropriate and fitting punish- ment for the offence.
The letter, though a contempt of Court, and punishable by fine and imprisonment, having been written by a Practitioner in his individual and private capacity as a suitor, in respect of a supposed grievance as suitor, of an injury done to him as such suitor, and having no con- nection whatever with his professional character, or anything done by him professionally, either as an Attorney or Barrister, it was not com- petent for the Supreme Court to go further than award to the offence the customary punishment for contempt of Court; or to inflict a per- fessional punishment of indefinite suspension for an act not done professionally, and which, per se, did not render the party committing it unfit to remain a Practitioner of the Court. In re Wallace
2. Committal of publisher of Newspaper for alleged contempt of Court in commenting on the administration of justice in the Supreme Court of British Guiana. In re McDermott
CONTRACT, RESCISSION OF: See ACTION; Vendor and PURCHASER. COSTS-1. Where there had been delay in lodging petition of appeal within the prescribed time, and the right of appeal gone, leave was given to appeal on payment of costs. Casanova v. The Queen
2. Leave given to the Attorney-General of Victoria to appeal with- out giving security for costs. In re The Attorney-General of Victoria 3. Security for costs in a cause of forfeiture and penalties for breach of revenue laws, not necessary, as far as regards penalties. George v. The Queen
5. Attorney in Lower Canada acting in his own cause, and on his own behalf, entitled to fees as Attorney on record. Gugy v. Brown 6. Costs on reversal of decree of Court below in a cause of damage; both parties being held to blame. The "Agra" and The "Elizabeth Jenkins"
CRIMINAL SENTENCE OF COURTS IN THE COLONIES, APPEALS FROM: See APPEAL, 9; PREROGATIVE.
CROWN GRANT-Leases granted by the Governor of South Australia, under powers conferred on him by the Colonial Act, 21 Vict. No. 5, sec. 13, for regulating the sale and other disposal of waste lands belonging to the Crown, sealed with the public seal of the Province, but not enrolled or recorded in any Court, are not in themselves Records; and, though bad on the face of them, being for a larger quantity of land than allowed by the Act, cannot be annulled or quashed by a writ of Scire facias.
Such writ is a prerogative judicial writ which must be founded on a Record, and cannot under the Constitution of the Supreme Court in South Australia issue out of that Court.
The proper remedy for an unauthorized possession of lands of the Crown in the Colony is by information in Chancery, or Writ of intru- sion. The Queen v. Hughes
CROWN LANDS IN AUSTRALIA: See COLONIAL LAW, 1. CROWN, PREROGATIVE OF: See CONSTITUTION OF COURT OF JERSEY; PREROGATIVE.
CUSTOMS' ORDINANCES: See HARBOUR DUES; REVENUE.
DAMAGES-1. Exemption of owners having a licensed Pilot on board from damages. The "Velasquez'
2. Where both vessels were to blame in causing a collision the damages were directed to be equally divided. The "Agra” and “Eliza- beth Jenkins"
See ACTION; COLONIAL LAW, 4.
DAMAGES AND COSTS-1. Awarded by appellate Court on reversal of sentence of condemnation and forfeiture for alleged infraction of the Sierra Leone Customs Ordinances. Rolet v. The Queen
2. Where there was no probabilis causa for seizure of a Foreign vessel for an alleged infraction of the Slave Trade Act, 5 Geo. 4, c. 113, upon appeal damages and costs, which had been refused by the Court below, awarded. The "Ricardo Schmidt"
3. When there was probable cause for seizure the Vice-Admiralty Court refused to certify for damages and costs. Wilson v. The Queen
DATE OF WILL: See COLONIAL LAW, 7. DEBENTURE BOND-The St. A. & Q. Railway Company, incorporated by a local Act, being also a land company, transferred by agreement, together with the undertaking, all its property, lauds, rights, and ap- purtenances to the N. B. & C. Railway Company, also incorporated such agreement being confirmed by a private Act of the Imperial Parliament.
The N. B. & C. Railway Company having borrowed money, issued Debentures to secure the same; these were termed Mortgage De- bentures, the principal and interest thereon being secured on the undertaking, and all moneys to arise from the sale of the lands of the Company, all future calls on Shareholders, and all tolls and sums of money which should become due with the plant and rolling-stock, and with power of entry and possession of the same, in failure by the Company of payment of principal and interest as therein specified, with a proviso that nothing therein coutained should be held to limit the power of sale or appropriation by the company of any of the lands of the Company, nor constitute a charge on the same. These bonds were not registered :-
Held, by the Judicial Committee, first, that such Tebentures did not constitute a charge in the nature of an equitable mortgage on the
lands of the Company, so as to give the holders of such Debentures a right to restrain the sale of the lands by Judgment creditors of the Company, or any title to the proceeds of the lands when sold.
Secondly, that as Judgment creditors under an execution take the precise interest, and no more, which the debtor possesses in the pro- perty seized, the sale being a sale by the law, and not by the Com- pany, such Judgment creditors took the lands subject to any incum- brances, legal or equitable, that they were subject to in the hands of the Company. Wickham v. The New Brunswick and Canada Rail- way Company
DEBTOR AND CREDITOR: See INSOLVENCY.
DEBTS, LIABILITY OF NEW FIRM FOR DEBTS OF OLD FIRM: See INSOLVENCY, 1.
DECISIONS, OBSERVED UPON, OVERRULED, &c.-1. THE QUEEN v. CLARKE (7 Moore's P. C. Cases, 77), commented on and explained. The Queen v. Hughes
2. The case of THE QUEEN v. SCAIFE (17 Q. B. Rep. 238), in which a new trial was granted, after conviction for Felony by the Court of Queen's Bench, examined and not followed. Reg. v. Bertrand .. DERELICT: See SALVAGE. DESCENDANTS-construction used in Articles 765 and 766 in Code Civil; held to include natural children. Her Majesty's Procureur v. Bruneau ..
DEPOSITIONS OF WITNESSES at former trial for Felony read over to witnesses, and improperly received as evidence at fresh trial. Reg. v. Bertrand DEVIATION OF SHIP'S COURSE in performing salvage services ren- dering policies on salving vessels void, effect of, in estimating salvage reward. The "Scindia." The "Sir Ralph Abercrombie " DOMINICA-Power of the Legislative Assembly to commit a Member of that House for contempt. Doyle v. Falconer .. DUTCH REFORMED CHURCH, constitution of, under Cape of Good Hope Ordinances of 1843 and 1847. Murray v. Burgers
ECCLESIASTICAL LAW-1. L., the tenant and occupier of the Manor- house in the parish of W., instituted a suit in the Chancery Court of York against P., the Incumbent and perpetual Curate, for perturba- tion of a pew, held by L. as appurtenant to the Manor-house, and occupied by him therewith for nearly forty years. P., the Incum- bent, admitted the destruction of the pew by his orders and direction, but pleaded-first, to the jurisdiction of the Court, on the ground that the Church was not in law a Church, never having been re-consecrated since its general repair in 1825; and, secondly, that the permissive occupation of the pew was not sufficient to entitle L. to sue :-Held, by the Judicial Committee,-
First, that, it appearing from the evidence, that the Church of W. having been repaired and rebuilt under a Faculty, upon its old founda- tion, the Tower and eastern wall and windows never having been re- moved, and some of the Offices of the Church performed during the repairs, it had never ceased to be a Parish Church so as to require re- consecration, but remained subject to the authority of the Diocesan ; and that the judgment of the Court below overruling, the protest to the jurisdiction was right: and,
Secondly, that as a pew being in the Chancel may legally belong to
a party in respect of the ownership of a house, the title by occupation of such a pew was rightly pleaded, and, if proved, would entitle L. to maintain his suit.
Semble, If a Church be rebuilt on the old lines of foundation, in- cluding within it the same originally consecrated ground and no more, the Ecclesiastical law does not require that such Church should be re- consecrated. Parker v. Leach
2. The Dutch Reformed Church in the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope is a voluntary society, constituted and subsisting by mutual agreement. The regulation of its Ecclesiastical affairs depends upon contract; and the authority of its governing Bodies is derived wholly from the admission and agreement of the members, Ecclesiastical and lay, which constitute the Church or Society. This contract or agree- ment is embodied in certain laws and regulations, which were settled by Ordinance No. 7, in 1843; and subsequently altered, in 1847, by virtue of authority contained in the Ordinance of 1843. By Article 187 of the Ordinance of 1843, the Synod or General Assembly was organized, and made the sole and exclusive Tribunal for the trial of charges of false doctrine against Ministers. By one of the alterations made in 1847, the jurisdiction and authority thus given to the Synod as a Court of first instance was transferred to the Presbytery, with an appeal to the Synod; with liberty, where a case which concerns the welfare of the Church in general had been decided in the Superior Court, and, being capable of appeal, no appeal had been brought, for the Synod to take cognizance of it; though incapable of exercising or enforcing an original or primary jurisdiction. So Held by the Judicial Committee, on the construction of the Ordinances of 1843 and 1847, and the Laws and Regulations for the direction of the Dutch Re- formed Church appended thereto, upon an appeal from a sentence of the Supreme Court of the Cape of Good Hope, in a case where a suit had been brought in that Court against the Members composing a Synodical Commission, to reverse and annul a sentence of suspension of a Minister of that Church pronounced by the Synod:-
Semble, that since the alteration made by the Ordinance of 1847, the Synod has no discretionary power of assuming primary jurisdic- tion in a charge of false doctrine against a Minister; such charge must be made and determined in the first instance by the Presbytery. Murray v. Burgers
ELECTION OF JURATS: See CONSTITUTION OF THE ROYAL COURT OF JERSEY.
EQUITABLE MORTGAGE: See DEBENTURE BOND.
EVIDENCE-1. The burthen of proving that goods are not liable to Custom duties lies on the party claiming exemption. Rolet v. The Queen
2. What is necessary to prove a charge of fraudulent transfer in contemplation of Insolvency. Nunes v. Čarter
3. Admission of fresh evidence on appeal refused. The "Scindia" 4. A foreign vessel was seized in an English harbour under the Slave Trade Act, 5 Geo. 4, c. 113, and proceeded against under that Act:-Held, that rule of evidence in Statute, 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 60, could not be admitted. Presumptive evidence of vessel being engaged in the Slave Trade. The "Ricardo Schmidt "
5. A Prisoner was tried by the Court in New South Wales for Felony, the jury, not agreeing, were discharged, and a fresh trial had. On the second trial, at the same sittings, before another jury, some of
the witnesses having been re-sworn, the evidence given by them at the first trial was read over to them from the Judge's notes, liberty being given both to the prosecution and to the Prisoner to examine and cross-examine :-Held, that the course adopted by the Judge at the fresh trial was irregular, and could not be cured even by the con- sent of the prisoner. Reg. v. Bertrand EXTENSION OF TERMS OF LETTERS PATENT: See PATENT.
FALSE DOCTRINE-Proceedings against Minister of the Dutch Re- formed Church in the Cape of Good Hope on charges of false doctrine. Murray v. Burger's
FEES ALLOWED AN ATTORNEY in Lower Canada, acting in his own cause as Attorney on Record. Gugy v. Brown FELONY-No new trial from conviction lies. Reg. v. Bertrand FIEF, action to recover part of ungranted land of: See COLONIAL LAW, 10. FIERI FACIAS-According to the law of New Brunswick, freehold lands of debtor, if thre personal estate is exhausted, may be sold under a fi. fa. Wickham v. The New Brunswick and Canada Railway .. FIRE, LIABILITY OF MASTER FOR NEGLIGENCE OF SER- VANT: See COLONIAL LAW, 4.
FOREIGN LAW: See COLONIAL LAW, passim.
FOREIGN PATENT: See PATENT, 5.
FORMA PAUPERIS, appeal in: See APPEAL, 7.
FRAUDULENT POSSESSION: See BILL OF LADING, 1. FRAUDULENT PREFERENCE: See INSOLVENCY.
FRENCH LAW: See COLONIAL LAW, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11.
HARBOUR DUES-Sentence of the Vice-Admiralty Court of Sierra Leone, condemning goods and boats seized for breach of the Customs Ordinances of the Colony, reversed, with damages and costs: it being proved that the vessel from which the goods were unshipped, though off the harbour of Freetown, was not within three miles (the limit of jurisdiction) from the shore at the time of the unloading, and conse quently not liable to the harbour dues payable under the Customs Ordinances. Rolet v. The Queen
HOLOGRAPH WILL: See COLONIAL LAW, 8.
ILLEGITIMATE NIECE: See COLONIAL LAW, 5. INJUNCTION: See MORTGAGE.
INSOLVENCY-1. R., F., and R., partners in business, and dealing with F., S., & Co., took T. and S., clerks in their employment, into part- nership with them. The partnership was constituted by deed, to continue for three years, and a balance-sheet shewing the liabilities and assets of the existing firm was drawn up and admitted by all the partners. The new firm continued to trade, up to the period of its insolvency, upon the same footing and with the same books as the old firm-no distinction being made in their payments, or balances, or between the debts or assets of the new, or what was the old firm. F., S., & Co., continued to deal with the new as they had done with the old firm. R., F., and R. having become insolvent, F., S., & Co., creditors to a large amount, proved against the estate of the new firm. VOL. I. 3 3 C
« PreviousContinue » |