An Analytical Digest of the Cases Published in the New Series of the Law Journal Reports


Text from Document

ADMINISTRATION. Credito«. simple contract debt due to him from the in- testate or testator. Ibid. Ferguson v. Gibson (41 Law J. Rep. Chanc. 640; Law Rep. 14 Eq. 379) explained. Ibid. Per Cotton, L.J.,—There is nothing in Hinde Palmer's Act to prevent a creditor by specialty, where the heirs are bound, if he is the heir-at- law of an intestate, retaining the amount of such debt. Ibid. Decision of Chitty, J., affirmed. Ibid. 42.—Judgment debt: registration]—An un- registered judgment debt ranks as a simple contract debt bearing interest. Van Gheluive v. Neringckx, 51 Law J. Rep. Chanc. 929 ; Law Rep. 21 Ch. D. 189. 48.—Secured creditors]—The 10th section of the Judicature Act, 1875, incorporating into the administration of insolvent estates and the winding-up of companies the rules of bankruptcy as to the 44 respective rights of seoured and un- secured creditors,** does not affect the rights of either class of creditors inter se. Therefore a creditor who has obtained judgment against the executors of an insolvent testator is entitled to priority. In re Maggi; Winehouse v. Wine- house^ 51 Law J. Rep. Chanc« 560; Law Rep. 20 Ch. D. 545. Priority of judgments: registration. See Judg- ment. Proof. 44.—Evidence of claimant: corroboration]— The rule that a claim upon the estate of a de- ceased person cannot be maintained upon the unsupported testimony of the claimant applies to cases of alleged debt as well as to cases of alleged gift. Per Jessel, M JR.—The rule is a rule of prudence rather than of law; and in an action tried by a jury it is the duty of the Judge to re- commend the jury to disregard the unsupported evidence of the claimant; but if they should decline to do so, and should find for the claimant, quare if their verdict could be interfered with. In re Finch; Finch v. Finch (App), Law Rep. 23 Ch. D. 267. An English widow lady residing in Paris in a house wlnoh belonged' to her for her separate use, married an English gentleman, and by the marriage settlement certain plate which formerly belonged to her first husband was settled to her separate use. After the marriage, her husband having family plate of his own, sent it to his wife’s house in Paris, and she then sent her own plate to her son by her first marriage. Upon the death of the husband his family plate, and also a marble bust of himself, was in his wife’s house at Paris. In a suit for the ad- ministration of his estate his wife claimed the plate as having been given her in exchange for her own plate, and the buBt as having been pre- sented to her by her husband :—Held (reversing the decision of Kay, J.), that the surrounding circumstances did not furnish corroborative evidence in support of the olaim by the wife to the plate and bust, and that as the claim rested Digest, 1881-1885. on her unsupported testimony it could not be allowed. Ibid. 45.—Insolvent estate: annuity: valuation: contingency]—A testator covenanted to pay his daughter a sum of 5.000Z., with interest at four per cent, per annum, within one month after the death of his wife, and to pay his said daughter an annuity of 100Z. a year during the joint lives of himself and his wife and the life of the survivor, if his daughter should 60 long live. The testator died in 1879, leaving his widow and daughter surviving, and judgment for the ad- ministration of his estate, which was insolvent, was given in an action instituted by the daughter as a creditor. The daughter sent in a proof in respect of the principal sum and the annuity, and they were valued as at the date of the judgment. The testator’s widow died before the chief clerk had made his certificate:—Held, that section 10 of the Judicature Act, 1875, applied as to the proof which was of a con- tingent liability, and that, following the rules in bankruptcy as to contingent liabilities, the daughter was entitled to prove for the full amount of the 5,000Z., less a rebate of interest at four per cent, per annum for the period be- tween the date of the judgment and the death of the widow, but only for the amount of the arrears of the annuity at the time of the judg- ment, and for the amount accrued due between that time and the death of the widow, less a similar rebate. In re The Northern Counties of England Fire Insurance Company (Lim) (50 Law J. Rep. Chanc. 273) followed. In re Bridges; Hill v. Bridges, 50 Law J. Rep. Chanc. 470. 46-—Insolvent estate: unregistered bill of sale]—Under section 10 of the Judicature Act, 1875, the rules in bankruptcy do not apply so as to render an unregistered bill of sale void as against the unsecured creditors of a person who has died insolvent. In re Count D'Epineuil, 51 Law J. Rep. Chanc. 491; Law Rep. 20 Ch. D. 217. 47.—Secured creditor: bankruptcy rules]— Secured creditors of an insolvent estate claimed for 400Z. and interest; they valued their security at 500Z.; their names were struck out from the schedule of creditors in the chief clerk’s certifi- cate. The security realised more than 500Z.'*.— Held, that their right to the benefit of the security was not limited to 500Z. In re Hopkins; Williams v. Hopkins, 52 Law J. Rep. Chanc. 736; Law Rep. 18 Ch. D. 370. Appeal: right of creditor to appeal from refusal of claim. See Practice—Appeal, 47. Assent of creditors to misapplication of assets. See Executor, 6. Bond for payment of mortgage debt: right of creditor when barred by time. See Limita- tions, Statute or, 23. Executor’s action for administration: claim of creditor whether barred. See Limitations, Statute or, 25. C

About This Document

Total pages:
This document has no additional description.