Bell v Timiswood
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 20 June 1812 |
| Date | 20 June 1812 |
| Court | Ecclesiastical Court |
English Reports Citation: 161 E.R. 1066
IN THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS AT DOCTORS' COMMONS AND IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELEGATES.
BELL . timiswood. Prerogative Cburt^ Trinity Term, June 20th, 1812.-The Court never forces a joint administration. Judgment-Sir John Nicholl. The interest of Robert Timiswood has been admitted as one of the next of kin : Joseph Bell prays to be joined in the administration with him; Timiswood objects, and prays tkat it may be decreed solely to himself. The Court never forces a joint administration, [23] and for an obvious reason ; beeanse it is necessary for the administrators to join in every act, there might be a complete contrariety of action, and it would be in the power of one of them to defeat the whole administration. The question then is, to which of the two must the Court grant it in this instance 1 Both are in an equal degree of relationship; no objection is stated to Timiswood; but against Bell it is said that he has been twice a bankrupt, and that the last time there were no dividends. Surely, if...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lee Peter Michael v Tacplus Property Services Pte Ltd
...and could only be effective if the administrators were required by law to act jointly: at [18] and [19]. Bell v Timiswood (1812) 2 Phill Ecc 22; 161 ER 1066 (folld) Chay Chong Hwa v Seah Mary [1983-1984] SLR (R) 505; [1984-1985] SLR 183, CA (folld) Chay Chong Hwa v Seah Mary [1985-1986] SLR......
-
Tacplas Property Services Pte Ltd v Lee Peter Michael (administrator of the estate of Lee Chong Miow, deceased)
...of Hudson v Hudson [1737] 1 Atk 460; 26 ER 292, Earl of Warwick v Greville [1809] 1 Philim 123, Bell v Timiswood [1812] 2 Phill Ecc 22; 161 ER 1066 and Stanley v Bernes [1828] 1 Hagg Ecc 221; 162 ER 564 which held that administrators must act jointly. However, in the recent case Fountain Fo......
-
Philip King v Stephen King
...clear that they are going to be able to act together, this will prevent the effective administration of the estate ( Bell v Timiswood (1812) 2 Phillimore 22). (2) The Procedure Governing this Appeal 11 This appeal is brought under NCPR 1987 r.65. Appeals such as this are not common and, unu......
-
Tacplas Property Services Pte Ltd v Lee Peter Michael (administrator of the estate of Lee Chong Miow, deceased)
...of Hudson v Hudson [1737] 1 Atk 460; 26 ER 292, Earl of Warwick v Greville [1809] 1 Philim 123, Bell v Timiswood [1812] 2 Phill Ecc 22; 161 ER 1066 and Stanley v Bernes [1828] 1 Hagg Ecc 221; 162 ER 564 which held that administrators must act jointly. However, in the recent case Fountain Fo......