Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

LAW

C. ANDERSON, Esq

[blocks in formation]

Melbourne :
CHARLES F. MAXWELL, (G. PARTRIDGE & Co.), LAW PUBLISHERS, 458 CHANCERY LANE.

ADELAIDE : E. S. WIGG & SON.
LONDON : SWEET & MAXWELL LIMITED, 3 CHANCERY LANE.

[ocr errors]

Rec. fune, 22,1898. IN THIS VOLUME.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

37

160

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

116

499

.

11

[ocr errors]

185

142

226

[ocr errors]

Black In mo

VICTORIA
Craig v. Roberts .

Harris v. Gleeson

129 Cromie, In re .

Healy, Duncan v.

218 Real Estate &c., Heil, Ross v. • .

113 Bank v.

41 Henderson, Hodgson v. · 9 Abbott, Robinson v. .. . Cunliffe ; Rock Freehold Land

-- v. Thorne . . 193 Adam v. Town of Brunswick

Coy. v. . .

33 | Herman, Gerlach v. . Adamson, Corbett v.

22 Dalley v. Harding - .

175 Hick, Trustees Executors &c. Allcu v. Hills - . Dalrymple v. Prince of Wales

Cug. v. . . . Anderson v. Carter

and Bonshaw United Coy. 168 | Higgins v. Board of Land and Andrews, Cawsey v. .

3
Davies, In re ·

121
·

Works

- - Angus, Regina v. - . 205

Hills, Allen v. . . . Attorney-General v. Blackwell

Hodgson v. Henderson · . 9 Australasia, Bank of, Exparte De Alba v. Freehold Invest

Howlett v. Shire of Tambo . 223 - v. Merment and Banking Coy, 136, 165

Huddart, Parker & Coy. Ltd., cantile Finance &c. Coy. • Deasy v. Wilson . .

Kilpatrick v. . . . 210
Australian Freehold Land &c.
De Beer Monte and Coy., Re.

Hughen, Shire of Benalla v. .
Coy. v. Shire of Goulburn
Deegan v. Remington - -

Huon v. Dougharty . .
De Faro; Trustees Executor's
&c., Coy. v.

Huntly, Shire of, Èxparte ...
Bage, Lange v. . .

. . . De Leon ; Gerlach v. .

22 Bagley, Ex parte .

.
.
. 105
Dominion Banking &c., Cor.

Irrigable Estates Coy., In re ·
Baker, Bennett v. . .

poration Ltd., Stibbard v.

Irwin v. Poyntz Barthold, In will of

• .
Dougharty, Huon v.
Bartlett v. Bartleit

..
Drew, Re
.

. Bedwell, Walshe v.

.
Dut v. Perpetual Executors and

Jack, Dyson v..
Beasley, Taffs v. - ..

Trustees Association

James v. Town of Northcote · Bell, Setter v. - - 5, 157

Jenkins, Regina v.

178 Duggan v. Martin. Belton v. Belton ,

Jonas . Jonas · · · 201 Duncan v. Gibson .

120 Benalla, Shire of, v. Hughen 151

- v. Healy

218 Bennett v. Baker·

149
Lunn v. Roberts .

| Kampfhenteel, Hammon v. . 135 Gomm v.

223

Dunstan ; Shire of Borung v. . Birch & Coy. v. Patent Cork

95 | Kerang Times Publishing Coy., Dyson v. Jack ..

Inre, . . . . 163 Pavement Coy. . - 132, 209

Kilpatrick v. Huddart Parker
151
- O'Hea v.

& Coy., Ltd. .
. .
119 Edgerton, Preacher v. .

Kiudellan, Groom v. . . -- v. Poole

Equity Trustees &c., Coy. Ltd.; 155

Koebcke, Reg. v. Blackburn v. Miller

177 Rowe v. . . . Blackwell, Attorney-General v. 150 Errington v. Krone .

Krone, Errington v. . .
Board of Land and Works,

Essendon, Mayor of ; Cox v. .
Higgins v. · · ·
Evening Post Newspaper Coy.,

Lamsey, In re . .

125 Boardman, Gleeson v. . . 153 Ltd., In re

Lange v. Bage . .

181 Borung, Shire of, v. Dunstan · 95

Langlands v. Langlands . 44 Brind, L. Stevenson and Sons Fisher ; Bundoora Park Estate

Lennie, Miller v. . .

208 Ltd. v. . .

166 Coy. v. . . . . 107 Lennox, In the will of . . 19 Bristow v. The Queen . . 147, 171 Fitts v, Fitts .

83 | Lewis, Mercantile Bank v. . 93, 202 Brunswick, Town of, Adam v. 66

Lloyd v. Looker · · ·
Bundoora Park Estate Coy. v.
Foster Brewing Coy. Ltd. v.

Looker, Lloyd v. . . .
Fisher · ·

Youl .
Freehold Investment &c. Coy.,

Mackett v. Shields • .
Carr v. Carr. .
114 De Alba v. . . . 136, 165 Martin, Duggan v. .

226 Carter, Anderson v. 49

- v. McGinnis . Cawsey v. Andrews

3
Gay, Sawtell v. .

Marwick v. Orton .
.

. Chaplin v. Chaplin

18
218
Gerlach v. De Leon

Matthews, In the will of

39 Charlton ; Cook v.

Mattingley y. The Queen

- - v. Herman Charsley, Re .

Mayberry v. McQuade.
Gibson, Duncan v.
Christie, McGregor v.

20
.

141
Gleeson v. Boardman

McCrory v. Rivett
.

· · Clark, Sweetnam, v. .

McCulloch Carrying Coy. v.

- Harris v. Clements, In re . Gomm v. Bennett . .

Victorian Railways Coms. Cleverdon v. Towsend .

203

McDougall, Griffiths v. .
Gottor v. Sheppard
Cohen, In re

.

McGinnis, Martin v.
Goulburn, Shire of, Australian

.

96 Companies Act 1890

McGregor v. Christie
Freehold Land &c. Co. v.

. . 141 Cook v. Charlton . Griffiths v. McDougall

5+ McLaughlin v. Bank of Victoria

. Corbett v. Adamson

McLorinan, Ex parte
Groom v. Kindellan
Cotter y, Moran

.
.

. 157

. Gunter's Case ·

McQuade, Mayberry v. . County of Bourke Permanent

· ·

.

Mercantile Bank of Australia, Building &c., Society ;

In re · · · · 89, 105 Shire of Moorabbin v. . 139 | Hammon v. Kampfhenteel . 135 Cox v. Mayor &c. of Essendon 7 Harding, Dalley v.. . . 175 v Lewis · · · · 93, 202

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Queenscliff, Borough of, v.

Stiles, In re . .

v. Weigall . .

Robinson

140 Stoffers, Wootton v. ..

Mercantile Finance &c. Coy.,

Stokes v. Roughan

Bank of Australasia v. .

Real Estate &c., Bank

Merrilees v. Rhodes

| Sweetnam v. Clark -

219

Syme, Speight v..

Michael v. Thompson .

124

Cromie . .

Synnot v. Synnot .

Milne, Re .

Regina v. Angus .

. .

Taffs v. Beesley .

Miller, Blackburn v. .

177

-- v. Jenkins . .

178

Tambo, Shire of, Howlett v.

- v. Lennie ..

208

-- v. Koebcke.

27

Taylor v. Taylor.

Moorabbin, Shire of, Re

167

Reid and Sinnot, In re

Thompson, Michael v. .

----v. County

Remington ; Deegan v. .

Thorne, Henderson v. •

of Bourke Per. Bldg. Socy. 139

Rhodes, Merrilees v. .

219

Townsend, Noonan v. .

Moran, Cotter v. .

157

Rivett, McCrory v.

174

Towsend Cleverdon v. .

Mulholland v. Smith . · 130, 161

Roberts, Craig v. . .

Trustees Executors &c. Coy.

—, Dunn v. - -

v. De Faro · ·

Robinson v. Abbott

Nolan v. Nolan .

- Borough of Queens-

v. Hick . . . .

Noonan v. Tow nsend

cliff v. .

140

Northcote, Town of, James v. 185 Rock Freehold Land Coy. v.

.

v. Sparling .

Cunliffe ·

. .

160

O'Hea v. Black . . .

Ross, In the Will of

119

v. Heil -

-

.

113 Union Trustee Coy., Young v.

Orton, Marwick v. . . . 14

Osboldstone, Steele v.

Roughan, Stokes v.

- - 152

Rowe v. Equity Trustees &c.,

Coy., Ltd. .

Victoria, Bank of, McLaughlin

v. - . . . -

Patent Cork Pavement Co. ;

Birch and Co., v. · · 132, 209

- Bank of, v. Smith .

Sawtell v. Gay .

Pearson, In re

.

.

.

115 !

.

| Victorian Railways Commis-

Permanent Savings Building

i Schomann,'Shamrock Brewing

sioners, McCulloch Carry.

Society of Port Mel.

&c. Coy., v. .

ing v. . . . .

bourne ; Town of Port

Setter v. Bell . .

· 5, 157

Melbourne, v. · · ·

Shamrock Brewing &c., Coy. v.

Schomann . .

5 Walshe v. Redwell

Perpetual Executors &c., Asso-

. .

Sheppard, Gottor v. . . 151 | Webb v. Smith . .

ciation ; Duff v.

Shields, Mackett v. . . 38 | Weigall, Mercantile !

Pitson, In re

Sinnot and Reid, In re .

6 Welch, Re . .

Poole, Black v. .

.

Port Melbourne, Town of, v.

Smith, Bank of Victoria v.

Whittle, In re .

, Mulholland v. - - 130

Permanent Savings Build-

Wilson, Deasy v. .

ing Society of Port Mel.

, Webb v. . .

- v. Howard Smith and

and Sons Ltd., Wilson v. 188 Sons, Ltd.

bourne

.


.

.

Sparling, Trustees Executors

Woolf, In re . .

Poyntz; Irwin v. . .

Preacher v. Edgerton . .

&c., Coy. v. . .

| Wootton v. Stoffers . .

Speight v. Syme •

Prince of Wales and Bonshaw

United Coy.; Dalrymple v.

168

Spillane, In re

Steele v. Osboldstone .

152 Young v. Union Trustee

Stevenson & Sons Ltd. v. Brind 166 Coy.

Queen The, Mattingley, v. 143, 171 Stibbard v. Dominion Banking

Youl ; Foster Brewing Coy.

- Bristow v. - - 1.17, 171 &c. Corporation Ltd.

222 Ltd. v. . . .

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Before Hodges J.

Dyson V. JACK AND OTHERS.

29th June. IN RE THE COMPANIES ACT 1890, s. 145.

Partnership-Practice - ReceiverLeave of the Court 24d vune. 22nd June.

to sue. CompanyCompanies Act 1890 (No. 1074) 8. 145— Semble, per Hodges, J., that an application to the Court

CompromiseSanction of Court to Practice by the receiver of a firm for leave to commence an Costs.

action, may be made exparte. Where a company is being wound up by or subject to

Application on behalf of the receiver of the defendthe supervision of the Court, an application under 8. / ants Andrew Jack & Coy., for leave to commence and 145 of the Companies Act 1890, must be supported

prosecute action against certain debtors of the defendby eridence as to the amount (if any) of costs agreed

ant firm. The application was made exparte and was to be paid by the contributory. Such costs should

supported by affidavit. in the first instance be paid to the liquidator.

Mr. Isaacs in support. : All the English writers on HODGES, J.: Without reference to any particular

practice states that the application should be by application, I desire to state that, in all applications summous. If this practice be correct it appears hard on behalf of liquidators of companies to sanction

to see who ought to be served with the summons. agreements of compromise between the liquidator and any contributory, I shall require an affidavit stating

His Honor said : I can see the difficulty suggested specifically the amount, if any, which the contributory

as to determining what persons should be serred with has agreed to pay towards the costs of the application.

the summons, and I do not see the necessity for servIf no sum has been agreed so to be paid I shall require

ing anyone. If a summons were held to be necessary that to be stated also. Where an agreement has been

the practice would be very similar to that provided by made as to payment of or towards the costs of the ap

the rules in respect of the winding up of trading complication, I shall require the costs agreed upon to be

panies, where all applications in Chambers are directed paid in the first instance to the liquidator so as to

to be made on summons, the usual effect of this being make them moneys which come under his control. I

that liquidators have frequently to go to the expense have several applications of this nature before me

of issuing a summons which is served on no one. I which I am holding back until I have been furnished shall make the ord

shall make the order on this exparte application; and with the above information, but I wish to be under

if anyone thinks he is entitled to object, of course, he stood to make the above remarks generally, and with may do so. Certify for counsel. out reference to any particular application.

Solicitors for the applicant, Blake & Riggall.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »