Caldwell v Dawson

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date07 February 1850
Date07 February 1850
CourtExchequer

English Reports Citation: 155 E.R. 1

IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER

Caldwell
and
Dawson

S C 14 Jur 163

The EXCHEQUER REPORTS. REPORTS of OASES ARGUED arid DETERMINED in the COURTS of EXCHEQUER and EXCHEQUER CHAMBER, Hilary Vacation, 13 VICT., to Michaelmas Vacation, 14 VICT., both inclusive. By W. N. WELSBY, of the Middle Temple; E. T. HURLSTONE, of the Inner Temple, and J. GORDON, of the Middle Temple, Esquires, Barristers-at-Law. Vol V. London, 1851. [1] exchequer reports hilary vacation, 13 vict CALDWElL v dawson Feb 7, 1850-An assignment of a policy of assurance aa security for a debt, with a proviso for i edemption on payment, is a mortgage within the 55 Geo 3, c 184, Sched paitl,aiid therefore requires an ad valorem stamp [S C 14 Jur 163] Debt on an indenture, whereby the defendant covenanted to pay the plaintiff 7001 and, interest, on the 6th of March, 1847 Plea, non est factum At th,e trial, before Pollock, C B, at the Surrey Summer Assizes, 1849, the plamtift gave in evidence the indenture, the matenal pait of which is as follows - This indenture, made the 26th December, 1846, between Samuel Thomas, (who is hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, styled "the said borrower,") of the hrt,t part, George Dawson, of the second part, and Frederick Calrlvvell, Henry Chilton, and Fiederick James Fuller, of fche tbncl part Whereas, by a policy of assurance of the English and Scottish Law Life Assurance arid Loan Association, dated, &i , the funds of thesaicl Association aie charged with the payment to the executors, administrators, or asaign$ of the said boriower, of 14001 within three months after proof of his decease, subject to the payment of an annual premium of Jrtl 10s, and to the provisions in the said policy expressed And wheieas the said boriower hath agreed wrth the said parties hereto of the third part, for the loan of 7001, on the security of an assignment of the said policy, and also by the joint and several covenants of the s.ud bor [2]-rower and of the sard party hereto of the second pat thereinafter contained Now thia indenture wittiesseth, That, in consideration of the sum of 7001 to the said borrower paid by the said partres hereto of the thrrcl part, before the execution of these pieaents, the receipt whereof the said bormwer cloth hereby acknowledge, he the said borrower doth by these presents grant, bargain, sell, assign, and transfer unto the Said paities hereto of the third pait, their executois, administrators, and assigns, oil that the said recited policy, and the money thereby insured, and all bonuses, benefit, artd advantage to be had or received therefrom, to have, hold, receive, and take the qaid policy, monies, and premises unto the said parties hereto of the third part, theic executors,, administrators, and assigns , subject, nevertheless, to the proviso for redemption hereinafter contained [Here followed a power of attorney, enabling Ex DiV XI,-1 2 CALDWELL V DAW8ON 0 EX 3 the parties of the third part to receive the amount of the policy ] Piovided always, that in case the said borrower, his heirs, executors, or adrninistiatots shall pay unto the said parties heieto of the third pait, then...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • Hedley Byrne & Company Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 28 May 1963
  • Mullen v Barr & Company M'Gowan v Barr & Company
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session
    • 20 March 1929
    ...case that I have discovered which supports the relevancy of such a claim as is made in this action is George v. SkivingtonELR, (1869) L. R., 5 Ex. 1. … In subsequent cases, however, George v. Skivington appears not to have been followed, although it finds support in the judgment of Brett, M......
  • Macdonald v Wyllie & Son
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session
    • 22 December 1898
    ...3 R. 535. 2 Heaven v. PenderELR, L. R., 11 Q. B. D. 503; Gardiner v. MainSC, Nov. 29, 1894, 24 R. 100; George v. SkivingtonELR, 1869, L. R, 5 Ex. 1. 3 19 R. 1 3 R. 535, at p. 540. 1 L. R., 11 Q. B. D. 503. 2 24 S. L. R. 95. 1 March 15, 1895, 22 R. 491, at p. 505. 2 Morrison v. Maclean's Tru......
  • Duke v Jackson
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session
    • 29 January 1921
    ...plea in law and dismiss the action. Other cases referred to were: Gillespie Brothers & Co.ELR, [1896] 2 Q. B. 59; GeorgeELR, (1869) L. R., 5 Ex. 1; HeavenELR, (1883) 11 Q. B. D. 503; ClarkeELR, [1903] 1 K. B. 155; PreistELR, [1903] 2 K. B. 148. The pursuer reclaimed, and the case was heard ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • FTC v. BurnLounge Points and Authorities
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 5 June 2007
    ...1293, 1297.) According to BurnLounge, it has licensed more than two million song titles from independent and major record labels. (Gale TT 4-5, Ex. 1, pp. 2, 87; Liggins 11, Ex. 23 pp. 395, 597.) There are two basic classes of BurnLounge participants who operate its online stores: "Retailer......
4 books & journal articles
  • CHAPTER 2 TAX CONSIDERATIONS IN OIL AND GAS PROMOTIONAL AGREEMENTS
    • United States
    • FNREL - Special Institute Oil and Gas Agreements (FNREL)
    • Invalid date
    ...land containing three separate and distinct seams of coal. The regulations conclude that A owns three separate properties. Reg. § 1.614-1(a)(5) ex. 1. [86] Rev. Rul. 77-136, 1977-1 C.B. 167, superseding Rev. Rul. 58-231, 1958-1 C.B. 247 (50 percent of taxable income of the property depletio......
  • Disciplinary Opinion: People v. Smith
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Lawyer No. 40-7, July 2011
    • Invalid date
    ...was admitted into evidence as exhibit 10. 4. Respondent and Beattie provided differing testimony as to the depth of this discussion. 5. Ex. 1. 6. Respondent testified that he drafted three letters to Beattie and that Fielder himself drafted all of the other letters his office sent to Beatti......
  • The Sale of Technology-based Businesses in a Challenging Market
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Lawyer No. 31-4, April 2002
    • Invalid date
    ...continues one of three businesses of the target, this requirement is satisfied. See Treas. Regs. §§ 1.368-1(d)(2)(ii) and 1.368-1(d)(5), Ex. 1. 82. IRC § 83. Id. 84. However, if a fairly significant portion of the target's assets are disposed of prior or subsequent to the merger, and those ......
  • Proposed loss disallowance regulations.
    • United States
    • Tax Executive Vol. 43 No. 1, January 1991
    • 1 January 1991
    ...subsidiary and any loss on its disposition remains subject to Treas. Reg. [section] 1.337(d)-1 (see Treas. Reg. [section] 1.337(d)-1(a)(5), Ex. (1)(ii)). Temp. Reg. [section] 1.337(d)-2T. For dispositions or deconsolidations after november 18, 1990, and before February 1, 1991, Temp. Reg. [......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT