Bowes, - Appellant; The Directors, etc. of The Hope Life Insurance and Guarantee Company, - Respondents
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 30 March 1865 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 30 March 1865 |
English Reports Citation: 11 E.R. 1383
House of Lords
Winding - up Acts - 10 and 11 Vict. c. 78 - 19 and 20 Vict. c. 47 - 25 and 26 Vict. c. 89 - Creditor - Assignee of a Judgment - Practice when Judgment Impeached.
Mews' Dig. iii. 1668, 1671, 1708, 1713. S.C. 35 L.J. Ch. 574; 12 L.T. 680; 13 W.R. 790; 11 Jur. N.S. 643. As to (i.) companies registered under former Acts, distinguished in In re London India Rubber Co., 1869, L.R., 1 Ch. 331; (ii.) discretion to refuse order for winding up, distinguished in In re Brighton Hotel Co., 1868, L.R. 6 Eq. 342; and explained in In re General Co. for Promotion of Land Credit, 1870, L.R. 5 Ch. 369; and see In re Chapel House Colliery Co., 1883, 24 Ch. D. 265.
BOWES,- Appellant; THE DIRECTORS, etc. of THE HOPE LIFE INSURANCE AND GUARANTEE COMPANY,- Respondents [March 28, 30, 1865]. [Mews' Dig. iii. 1668, 1671, 1708, 1713. S.C. 35 L.J. Ch. 574; 12 L.T. 680; 13 W.R. 790; 11 Jur. N.S. 643. As to (i.) companies registered under former Acts, distinguished in In re London India Rubber Co., 1869, L.R., 1 Ch. 331 ; (ii.) discretion to refuse order for winding up, distinguished in In re Brighton Hotel Co., 1868, L.R. 6 Eq. 342 ; and explained in In re General Co. for Pro- 1383 XI H.L.C., 390 BOWES V. HOPE, ETC., GUARANTEE CO. [1865] motion of Land Credit, 1870, L.R. 5 Ch. 369; and see In re Chapel House Colliery Co., 1883, 24 Ch. D. 265.] Wmding^up Acts-10 and 11 Viet. c. 78-19 and 20 Viet. c. 47-25 and 26 Viet. c. 89-Creditor-Assignee of a Judgment-Practice when Judgment Impeached. The 8th part of the " Companies Act, 1862 " (25 and 26 Viet. c. 89) includes and applies to all companies which had been registered other than {as well as) companies registered under that Act itself. " Registered companies " there means registered under that Act itself; " unregistered companies," all those which had been registered under other Acts antecedently to its passing. Therefore, an insurance company which was formed in 1852, and registered under the Act of 1844 (7 and 8 Viet. c. 110), and which ceased to carry on business in 1855, was held to be capable of being made the subject of a winding-up order under the 25 and 26 Viet. c. 89. Ordinarily speaking, it is not under the provisions of the 25 and 26 [390] Viet, c. 89, s. 199, a discretionary matter with the Court, when a, debt, due by a registered company, has been established and remains unsatisfied, to refuse to the creditor an order for winding up the company. But (per Lord Cranworth) it is possible that a case might occur in which the Court could refuse such an order. H., an insurance company, registered under the " Joint Stock Company's Act, 1844," granted a policy on a life. H. transferred its business and its liabilities to another company, M. The life fell; an action was brought against the H. company. Several pleas were pleaded: a director and agent of the M. company entered into a negotiation with the Plaintiff and got the policy transferred to himself; the pleas were then withdrawn, and judgment entered against the H. company. The director then assigned the policy and judgment to B. as trustee for another person. Execution was issued, and a return of nulla bona made. B. then presented a petition for a winding-up order against the H. company. The Master of the Rolls granted the order. The Lords Justices offered to B. the opportunity of going into evidence in support of his claim, which was alleged by the H. company to be collusive; but he refused to do so, insisting that that company could not impeach it except by filing a bill to stay the judgment. On this refusal the Lords Justices discharged the Order of the Master of the Rolls : Held, that the Order of the Master of the Rolls could not be sustained, the H. company being entitled to file a bill to impeach the judgment. But the petitioner was not bound, as a preliminary to his right to the order, to go into farther evidence in support of his claim, for, there being a judgment in his favour, the burden of impeaching it lay on the company. The Order of the Lords Justices was therefore reversed, aad the petition was ordered to stand over until a fixed day, on the Respondents undertaking to file a bill to impeach the judgment. The costs of the appeals to the Lords Justices and to the House were ordered to be costs in the cause. This was an appeal against a decision of the Lords Justices overruling a previous decision of the Master of the Rolls. The " Hope Mutual Life " Assurance Society was, on. the 20th, April 1852, duly registered under the 7 and 8 Viet. c. 110. The capital (£100,000) was divided into [391] 10,000 shares of £10 each. The sum of £1 alone was called up. The society at once commenced business and granted several life policies. On the 5th February 1855, Hermann Galles effected an insurance for £1000 on his own life. It was one of the conditions of the policies effected by the Company, that the funds of the Company should alone be liable, and that individual shareholders should be exempted from all personal responsibility. In August 1855, the Hope Company transferred its business and effects to the Mitre Life Assurance Company, and the Mitre Company taking possession of the property of the Hope Company, adopted its existing policies and undertook to indemnify it against all its liabilities. This policy and three small annuities constituted these liabilities. Hermann Galles died on or before February 1856, 1384 BOWES V. HOPE, ETC., GUARANTEE CO. [1865] XI H.L.C., 392 and in the course of that year a claim was made against the Hope Compaq in respect of his policy. The matter was discussed in letters between Messrs. Cotterell the solicitors for the claimant, and the officers of the Mitre Company. In May 1857, administration of the effects of Hermann Galles was granted to John Gaspard Schlappfer, who in July 1857 brought, in the Queen's Bench, an action on the policy, against the Hope Company. There were several pleas put on the record on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Intraco Ltd; Wei Giap Construction Company (Pte) Ltd
-
Hanover Investors Management LLP (on Behalf of Hanover Catalyst Fund) v Hawkwing Plc
... ... 2 Hawkwing Plc (‘the Company’) was incorporated on 16 August 2011 and is ... to the Company's website (1) the directors of the Company are Keith Sadler, Ken Wotton, Ian ... The Company also obtained a guarantee from IFG Limited for IFG SPP's obligations under ... to assets owned by the company, any hope or expectation that the company would or might ... achieved: Re AA Mutual International Insurance Co Ltd [2005] 2 BCLC 8 , Auto Management ... ex debito justitiae to a winding up order: Bowes v Hope Life Insurance & Guarantee Co (1865) 9 ... ...
-
Southard & Company Ltd Re
...supporting creditors. 14 The classic statement on this subject is to be found in what was said by Lord Cranworth in Bowes v. The Hope Life Insurance & Guarantee Company, ((1865) 11 H.L.C. 389) where he said: "… it is not a discretionary matter with the Court when a debt isestablished, and n......
-
John Leslie Taylor v The Whitehall Partnership Ltd
...to him and cannot pay the amount due to him: see, by way of examples, Bowes v Directors of Hope Life and Insurance Guarantee Co (1865) 11 HL Cas 389 per Lord Cranworth at 402; and Re Chapel House Colliery Co (1883) 24 Ch D 259, CA. In such a case, he would usually be entitled to a winding u......
-
A Guide To Appointing Liquidators Over A BVI Company
...18 Section 168(1). 19 Sections 168(2)(a) and (b). 20 Sections 168(3) and 168(4). 21 Section 167(1). 22 Bowes v Hope Life Insurance (1895) 11 HLC 389; Re P&J MacRae Ltd [1961] 1 WLR 229 23 Re Lowerstoft Traffic Services Ltd [1986] BCLC 81 24 Section 167(2). 25 Section 167(4). The content of ......
-
WINDING UP PETITIONS FOUNDED ON A BONA FIDE DISPUTED DEBT
...(hereafter ‘CA’). 2 Countless cases may be cited in support of this proposition, including: Bowes v Hope Life Insurance and Guarantee Co(1865) 11 HLC 389 at 402; Re Western of Canada Co(1873) LR 17 Eq 1 at 6 and 7; Re Crigglestone Coal Company Ltd[1906] 2 Ch 327 at 330—331; Re East Coast Sh......
-
Insolvency Law
...order ex debito justitiae is a proposition laid down well over a century ago (Bowes v The Hope Life Insurance and Guarantee Company(1865) 11 HLC 389 at 402; 11 ER 1383 at 1389) and followed by many Commonwealth courts, including the Singapore courts (Wei Giap Construction Co (Pte) Ltd v Int......