Results: 105

  • In Re Rhodes

    06 Feb 1886 31 ChD 499, Ch D

    PRACTICEPayment outRules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order LV., r. 2, sub-r. 1.
    PEARSON, J.:— I have the misfortune to differ from Vice-Chancellor Bacon. My feeling is very strong against disposing of large sums in this way. I think it is much better where the amount to be disposed of is so large, that the facts should be stated in a petition, in case the matter has to be questioned in any way. If the Court of Appeal says that I am bound to order payment out on summons, of course I must do so. I have not a word to say against the persons who come before me in Chambers; many of
  • Clark v Wray

    06 Nov 1885 31 ChD 68, Ch D

    PRACTICEActionSpecific Performance
  • Duguid v Fraser

    16 Jan 1886 31 ChD 449, Ch D

    WILLPower to appoint to Husband and ChildrenAppointment in favour of Objects of Power
  • In Re James’s Trade-Mark; James v Parry

    21 Dec 1885 31 ChD 340, Ch D

    Subsequent citations: 1.
    TRADE MARKTrade-marks registration act, 1875 (38 & 39 vict. c. 91), s. 10Distinctive Device
  • In Re Strong (No 1)

    16 Dec 1885 31 ChD 273, CA

    PRACTICEAppealSecurity for Costs
  • Bridgend Gas and Water Co v Dunraven

    03 Nov 1885 31 ChD 219, Ch D

    LANDLands clauses consolidation act, 1845, s. 9 [revised ed. statutes, vol. ix., p. 631]Owner under Disability
  • Jenner-Fust v Needham

    13 Feb 1886 31 ChD 500, Ch D

    04 May 1886 32 ChD 582, CA

    MORTGAGEForeclosureReceipt of Rents by Receiver between Date of Certificate and Day fixed for Redemption.
    COTTON, L.J.:— We are of opinion that there is no probability of redemption, and we therefore think that the 4th of June is a reasonable date to fix for redemption. We think, however, that the receiver should make a further affidavit, stating that he has received no subsequent rents; and that if he cannot do so the matter must come before the Court again. We cannot allow the mortgagees the subsequent interest up to the 4th of June, one of the terms upon which the reference to Chambers was waived being that they should forego their claim to such interest.
  • In Re Lewis; Lewis v Williams

    20 Feb 1886 31 ChD 623, CA

    PRACTICETimeMotion in Court to vary Order made by Judge of Chancery Division in Chambers
  • In Re Moss; Levy v Sewill

    27 Oct 1885 31 ChD 90, Ch D

    MORTGAGEMortgagor and MortgageePayment off of Mortgage
  • In Re Summerville

    08 Dec 1885 31 ChD 160, CA

    PRACTICELunacy Regulation ActPetition for Application of Property of alleged Lunatic

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies