Ablett v Basham
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
| Judgment Date | 31 January 1856 |
| Date | 31 January 1856 |
English Reports Citation: 119 E.R. 760
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 25 L. J. Q. B. 239; 2 Jur. N. S. 285.
[1019] ablett against basham. Thursday, January 31st, 1856. Under The Common Law Procedure Act, 1852 (15 & 1C Viet. c. 56), sect. 6 and Schedule (A.) No. 1, an attorney suing in person may indorse the writ of summons thus: "This writ was issued in person by the within named I. A., who resides at" &c., naming his place of business, though it is not the place where he sleeps. [S. C. 25 L. J. Q. B. 239 ; 2 Jur. N. S. 285.] From the affidavits on which the rule after mentioned was obtained, it appeared that the plaintiff and defendant were both attorneys of this Court. That the defendant was served with a writ of summons requiring him to cause an appearance to be entered &c. That the writ was endorsed thus : "This writ was issued in person by the within named Isaac Ablett, who resides at number 6, Newcastle Street, Strand, in the parish of St. Clement Danes, in the county of Middlesex. The plaintiff claims" &c. That the defendant has a good defence on the merits. That he is advised that it is material for him to serve the plaintiff with a subposna to attend at the trial, for the purpose of his producing certain documents. That defendant knows the house, No. 6, Newcastle Street, Strand, described on the indorsement as the residence of plaintiff; and that the shop and house are occupied by a person of the name of Siggers, who carries on the business of a breeches-maker there. That on the door of the said house is a brass plate, upon which the name of plaintiff is engraved ; but that plaintiff does not reside at the said house, or does he occupy any part thereof either as a residence or an office. For that the said Siggers informed defendant that he (Siggers) allowed plaintiff to have his letters directed to the said house, but that plaintiff did not occupy any part of the said premises. The above...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Laubscher v Native Commissioner, Piet Retief
...v. 1958 (1) SA p549 Lydenburg Rural Licensing Board, 1933 T.P.D. op bl. 485; Brits Town Council v Pienaar, N.O. and Another, 1949 (1) SA op bl. 1019. Alternatiewelik, die uiteensetting van eis hou geen verband met die bewering dat respondent nie sy diskressie uitgeoefen het en is dus irrele......
-
Slator v Slator
...v. M'Dowell 9 H. of L. Cas. 619. Blackwell v. EnglandENR 8 El. & Bl. 541. Attenborough v. ThompsonENR 2 H. & N. 559. Ablett v. BashamENR 5 El. & Bl. 1019. Hewer v. Cox 30 Law. Jour., N. S., Q. B. 73. Woodroffe v. GreeneUNK 12 Ir. Ch. Rep. 473. Wolsely v. WorthingtonUNK 14 Ir. Ch. Rep. 369. ......