Clough v Bond
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1837 |
| Date | 01 January 1837 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 40 E.R. 1016
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. 8 L. J. Ch. (N. S.), 51; 2 Jur. (O. S.), 958. See Johnson v. Newton, 1853, 11 Hare, 169; Newton v. Hallett, 1868, 19 L. T. 472; In re Speight, 1883, 22 Ch. D. 745; In re Brogden, 1888, 38 Ch. D. 567.
clough v. bond. Nov. 24, 25, 1837 ; Nov. 17, 1838. [S. C. 8 L. J. Ch. (N. S.), 51 ; 2 Jur. (0. S.), 958. See Johnson v. Newton, 1853, 11 Hare, 169; Newton v. Halleit, 1868, 19 L. T. 472; In re Speight, 1883, 22 Ch. D. 745 ; In re Brogden, 1888, 38 Ch. D. 567.] On the death of an intestate, administration to her estate was granted to her son and daughter. The daughter being then under coverture, the assets were, in May 1831, paid into a banking house, to the joint account of her husband and her brother, the administrator ; and the whole of the fund, with the exception of the share of one of the next of kin, who was abroad, was soon afterwards paid away among the several parties entitled, by means of cheques signed by the two persons in whose names the account stood. The husband of the administratrix died in Dec. 1831, and, ten months afterwards, her brother and co-administrator drew out the balance, and, having applied it to his own use, absconded. Held, that the estate of the husband of the administratrix was answerable for the loss. Whether the administratrix was not also personally liable, Ann Dixon died in the month of November 1829, leaving certain testamentary papers, but intestate as to the bulk of her personal estate, which, therefore, became distributable among her next of kin, who were very numerous. Letters of administration, with the testamentary papers annexed, were granted to her two surviving children, Emily Bond, then the wife of John Bond, and Thomas Reup Dixon. The residuary estate consisted chiefly of Government stock. This stock [491] was sold in the month of May 1831, and, with a view to distribution among the several persons entitled, the proceeds, to the amount of about 18,000, were paid into the banking house of Child & Co., and there placed to an account in the joint names of John Bond and Thomas Reup Dixon. At the same time it was arranged that all cheques drawn on Child & Co. upon that account should be signed by both the parties in whose names the fund stood. In the course of a few months afterwards, the whole of the respective shares of the next of kin were duly paid or provided for, by means of cheques drawn in that form, except the share of Louisa Revell Clough, the wife of John Clough, who, with her husband, was then expected very shortly to return from India. The value of Mrs. dough's share, being one eighteenth of the clear fund, amounted, after deducting the duty and costs, to 988, 6s. 8d. ; and this sum, together with a further sum reserved to answer the expenses of administration, and making a total of 1348, remained in the hands of Child & Co. upon the joint account, down to the death of John Bond, which happened on the 15th of December 1831. In the months of October and November in the following year Thomas Reup Dixon drew out, by cheques, the balance of the account at Child's, and applied the money to his own use ; and shortly afterwards he absconded and left the kingdom. Mr. and Mrs. Clough did not arrive in this country from India until the end of the year 1834. Soon after their return they filed the present bill, praying for an account of Ann Dixon's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
HM Revenue and Customs v Holland; Re Paycheck Services 3 Ltd
...to the trust estate to put it back to what it would have been had the breach not been committed: Caffrey v. Darby (1801) 6 Ves. 488; Clough v. Bond (1838) 3 M. & C. 490. Even if the immediate cause of the loss is the dishonesty or failure of a third party, the trustee is liable to make good......
-
Murray v Leisureplay Plc
...had the breach not been committed (see Caffrey v Darby (1801) 6 Ves 488, [1775–1802] All ER Rep 507 and Clough v Bond (1838) 3 My & Cr 490, 40 ER 1016). Even if the immediate cause of the loss is the dishonesty or failure of a third party, the trustee is liable to make good that loss to the......
- Derby & Company Ltd v Weldon (No. 1)
-
Target Holdings Ltd v Redferns
...to put it back to what it would have been had the breach not been committed: Caffrey v. Darby (1801) 6 Ves. 488; Clough v. Bond (1838) 3 My. and Cr. 490. Even if the immediate cause of the loss is the dishonesty or failure of a third party, the trustee is liable to make good that loss to th......
-
AN ACCOUNT OF ACCOUNTS
...16 Sim 230 at 232; (1848) 60 ER 861 at 862; In re Brogden(1888) 38 Ch D 546 at 567, applying Lord Cottenham LC in Clough v Bond(1838) 3 My and Cr 490; In re Stevens[1898] 1 Ch 162 at 172; National Trustees Executors and Agency Co of Australia Ltd v Dwyer(1940) 63 CLR 1 at 22. 107[1992] EWCA......
-
Equitable compensation for breach of trust: off Target.
...c 29, s 3. (75) See Caffrey v Darby (1801) 6 Ves Jun 488, 496; 31 ER 1159, 1162 (Eldon MR); Clough v Bond (1838) 3 My & Cr 490, 496-7; 40 ER 1016, 1018 (Lord Cottenham LC); Fyler v Fyler (1841) 3 Beav 550, 568; 49 ER 216, 224 (Lord Langdale (76) Re Windsor Steam Coal Co (1901) Ltd [1929......
-
Remoteness Criteria in Equity
...of the earlier authorities to which Street J referred: Caffrey vDarby (1805) 6 Ves Jun488, 31 ER 1159; Clough vBond (1838) 3 My & Cr 490, 40 ER 1016; Salway vSalway (1831) 2 Russ& M 215, 39 ER 376; aff’d sub nom White vBaugh (1835) 9 Bligh NS 181, 3 Cl & Fin 44, 5 ER1261, 6 ER 1354 (HL).27 ......