Bolland v Disney
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1827 |
| Date | 01 January 1827 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 38 E.R. 608
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
[351] bolland v. disney. May 21, 1827. In the policies affected by the Amicable Society, there is no exception as to death by the hands of justice : a person, insuring his life in that office, afterwards suffered death for a criminal offence : the policy was not thereby avoided. By a policy of assurance, which, on the llth of January 1815, Henry Fauntleroy effected on his life, with the Amicable Society, it was witnessed, that he, Fauntleroy, was admitted a member of that society ; and the corporation bound themselves and their successors to pay to his executors, administrators, or assigns, such a proportion of the joint stock or fund, as on his death should become due according to the society's charter and bye-laws. In October 1824, Fauntleroy was declared a bankrupt; shortly afterwards he was convicted of forgery, and, on the 30th of November, he was executed, pursuant to his sentence. The premiums had been duly paid up to the time of his death. The sixth bye-law was in the following words :-" That every policy hereafter to be issued (other than in exchange of policies heretofore issued, or in lieu of such policies, in case of their being lost) shall contain a condition to be, and shall be, null and void, in case the declaration required by the fifth bye-law shall in any respect be untrue or fraudulent, or in case the person admitted a member on his or her own life, or the person on whose life the contribution is made, shall go out of Europe, or engage or be employed in military service out of the United Kingdom, or in naval or maritime service or occupation, without first obtaining license in writing from the court of directors, and paying such further or additional premium as shall be required by them." These were the only cases in which it was expressly provided, that the policies should be void. [352] The bill was filed by the assignees of Fauntleroy, praying that an assignment of the policy, which had been made in 1819, might be declared to be void, and that the Amicable Society might be decreed to pay to the Plaintiffs what was due on the insurance. The only question argued was between the Plaintiffs and the Amicable Society, who contended that, because Fauntleroy had perished by the hands of justice, no person could make any claim against them under the policy of insurance. Mr. Sugden, Mr. Pepys, and Mr. Koe, for the Plaintiffs. Mr. Shadwell, Mr. Base, and Mr...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Beresford v Royal Insurance Company Ltd
-
19 NLR 321
...M. 5 (1830) 2 Dow & Clark 1 and 4 Bli. 30; and Castrique v. Imrie, (1870) N. S. 194; and cf. in the Court of L . R. 4 H. L. 434. Chancery, 3 Russ. 351. 2 (1911) P, 108. 26 agreement of the parties, without further proof. Amicable Society v. Bolland 1 is a decision by the House of Lords, and......
-
The Amicable Society for a Perpetual Life Assurance Office, - Appellants; James Bolland, Joseph Hare, and Matthias Koops Knight, - Respondents
...bolland, joseph hare, and matthias koops knight,- Respondents [1830] [Mews' Dig. viii. 75. S.C. 2 Dow^Cl. 1; and, inlCourt of Chancery, 3 Russ. 351 (Holland v. Disney; Fauntleroy''s Case). Considered in Cleaver v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association, [1892] 1 Q. B. 149. See also Borradaile......