Camidge against Allenby
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1827 |
| Date | 01 January 1827 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 108 E.R. 489
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
S. C. 9 D. & R. 391. Observation adopted, Lichfield Union v. Greene, 1857, 1 H. & N. 890. Distinguished, Leeds and County Bank v. Walker, 1883, 11 Q. B. D. 88.
camidge against allenby. 1827. In an action for the price of goods, it appeared that the same were sold at York on Saturday the 10th of December 1825, and on the same day, at three o'clock in the afternoon, the vendee delivered to the vendor, as and for a payment of the price, certain promissory notes of the bank of D. and Co. at Huddersfield, payable on demand to bearer. D. and Co. stopped payment on the same day at eleven o'clock in the morning, and never afterwards resumed their payments ; but neither of the parties knew of the stoppage, or of the insolvency of D. and Co. The vendor never circulated the notes, or presented them to the bankers for payment; but on Saturday the 17th, he required the vendee to take back the notes, and to pay him the amount, which the latter refused : Held, under these circumstances, that the vendor of the goods was guilty of laches, and had thereby made the notes his own, and, consequently, that they operated as a satisfaction of the debt. [S. C. 9 D. & R 391. Observations adopted, Lichfield Union v. Greene, 1857, 1 H. & N. 890. Distinguished, Leeds and County Bank v. Walker, 1883, 11 Q. B. D. 88.] Assumpsit. The declaration contained counts for goods sold and delivered, and the common money counts. Plea, non assumpsit. At the trial before Hullock B., at K. B. XXXVII.-16* 490 CAMIDGE' V. ALLEN BY 6 U & C. 374. the York Lent Assizes 1826, a verdict was found for the plaintiff for 241., subject to the opinion of this Court on the following case:- This action was commenced to recover the sum of 241. alleged to be due from the defendant to the plaintiff for a quantity of corn sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant at York, in the morning of Saturday the 10th day of December 1825. On the same day, at [374] three o'clock in the afternoon, the defendant delivered to the plaintiff at York, and the latter then and there received as and for a payment of the price of the corn, four promissory notes for 51. each, and four such notes for 11. each, of the bank of Messrs. Dobson and Son, bankers at Huddersfield, in the county of York. The notes were in the following form, and the defendant's name was not written upon them :- " No. * " Huddersfield Old Bank, £5. "I promise to pay the bearer on demand 51. value received, 1st day of July 1823. " Entered, &c. " For john dobson and sons, "£5. "W. dobson." At eleven o'clock in the forenoon of the same 10th of December, Dobson and Sons stopped payment, having on the same morning and up to that hour paid all demands made upon them. They never afterwards resumed their payments, and shortly afterwards became bankrupts, and the plaintiff never received any part of the amount due on the notes. Huddersfield is distant from York about forty miles, and from Laythorn, the plaintiff's residence, fifty-two miles. At the time when the above notes were paid by the defendant to the plaintiff, neither of them knew that Dobson and Sons had stopped payment or were insolvent. The plaintiff never circulated the notes, nor did he ever present them to Dobson and Sons, the makers, for payment; but on Saturday the 17th of the same month of December, the plaintiff required the defendant to receive back the notes, and to pay him the amount of them, which the defendant then and ever since has refused to do. [375] Dodd for the plaintiff. The plaintiff is entitled to recover the price of his corn, unless he has by laches made the notes his own. It will be contended that he has done so, first, by not having presented the notes for payment, secondly, by not having offered to return them to the defendant earlier than he did. But presentment for payment was not necessary in this case, because the defendant was not a party to the notes, and cannot, under the circumstances, be damnified by the neglect to present them. This case differs from the several cases where bankers' notes having been taken before the bankers had stopped, presentment has been held to be necessary within a reasonable time after taking them. Here the notes were taken after the bankers had stopped, and they never resumed their payments. The defendant, therefore, cannot have been prejudiced by reason of the notes not having been presented for payment. If an action upon the notes had been brought against the bankers, or if the defendant had been an indorser, in either case it would have been necessary to aver and prove presentment for payment. But here the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mƒ€™DONNELL v MURRAY
...3 Camp. 324. Charnley v. GrundyENR 14 C. B. 608. Mossop v. Eadon 16 Ves. 430. Miller v. RaceENR 1 Burr. 452. Camidge v. AllenbyENR 6 B. & C. 373. Robson v. Oliver 10 Q. B. 704. Grant v. VaughanENR 3 Burr. 1516. Beven v. HillENR 2 Camp. 181. Robson v. BennettENR 2 Taunt. 388. COMMON LAW REPO......
-
Pelly v Wathen
...debt would be barred by the Statute of Limitations, in diminishing the amount of the lien as against third parties, Camidge v. Allenby (6 B. & C. 373). [358] the vice-chancellor [Sir James Wigram], The Plaintiff became second mortgagee of the freehold estates of William Lewis. At that time ......
-
Rogers v Langford
...(II East, 114). The same point was decided in Bowes v. Howe (5 Taunt. 30), which was a case of country bank notes. Camulge v. Alkiiiy (6 B. & C. 373), is directly in point. There the vendee, at three o'clock in the af-[640]-ternoon of the 10th of December, delivered to the vendor certain no......
-
Bond v Warden
...on the 22d it would have been paid. The Plaintiff was bound to present it before the expiration of that time: Garnidge v. Allenby (6 B. & C. 373, 382). As to the validity of the cheque itself, if the place of issue appears upon it, though not in a formal manner, the Court [587] would be rel......