Bruce and Others v Hunter
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 15 December 1813 |
| Date | 15 December 1813 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 170 E.R. 1448
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
Considered, In re Lloyd Edwards: Williams v Trench, 1891, 61 L J Ch. 22
[467] Wednesday, Dec 15, 1813 bruce and others v. hunter. (An agent who has advanced money for his principal in effecting insurances and other mercantile business, is entitled to charge interest, and at the end of every year to make a rest and add the interest then due to the principal.) [Considered, In re Lloyd Edwards: Williams v Trench, 1891, 61 L J Ch. 22 ] This was an action of assumpsit to recover the balance of an account The plaintiffs had effected insurances and advanced the premiums for the defendant, and had transacted other business as agents for him, from the year 1801 down to the present time. They had delivered an account to him annually, and at the close of each year, from the expiration of the first, had charged interest; and at each rest tie interest of the preceding year was added to the principal. It was proved, that at the several times when the annual accounts were rendered to the defendant, he had never objected to the charge of interest until the year 1811, when he said that he was not bound to pay any interest It was now urged, on his behalf, that interest could not be recovered against him, and much less according to the calculation...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Nadefinco Ltd; Trengganu State Economic Development Corporation
-
The Provincial Band of Ireland v O'Reilly and Others
...O'BRIEN, and GIBSON, JJ. THE PROVINCIAL BAND OF IRELAND and O'REILLY AND OTHERS Calton v. BraggENR 15 East. 223. Bruce v. HunterENR 3 Camp. 467. Fergusson v. FyffeUNK 8 C. & F. 121. Williamson v. WilliamsonELR L. R. 7 Eq. 542. Barfield v. LughboroughELR L. R. 8 Ch. App. 1. At-wood v. Taylor......
-
Pierck v Fothergill
...the jury might allow it in the shape of damages : Nichol v. Thompson (1 Campb. 52, n.); Galton v, Bragg (15 East, 223); Bruce v. Hwnter (3 Campb. 467), Slack v. Lowell (3 Taunt. 157); Harrisons. Allen (2 Bingh. 4); at all events, as the note was payable on demand, the Plaintiff was entitled......
-
Newell and Another v Jones
...interest. I believe that question has been raised in equity, but not decided. Brodrick, for the plaintiffs, cited Bruce v. Hunter (a). (a) 3 Camp. 467. In that case, it was held, that an agent who had advanced money for his principal in effecting insurances and other mercantile business, wa......