Crisp v Sir Henry Edward Bunbury, Baronet, and Others

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1832
Date01 January 1832
CourtCourt of Common Pleas

English Reports Citation: 131 E.R. 445

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

Crisp
and
Sir Henry Edward Bunbury, Baronet, and Others

SW. C. 1 Moo. & SC. 646; 1 L. J. C. P. 112. Discussed, Morrison v. Glover, 1849, 4 Ex. 42, 444; Reeves v. White, 1852, 17 Q. B. 1015. Referred to, Callaghan v. Dolwin, 1869, L. R. 4 C. P. 294. Distinguished, Prentice v. Landon, 1875, L. R. 10 C. P. 686. Referred to, Huckle v. Wilson, 1877, 2 C. P. D. 414. Discussed, Municipal Building Society v. Dent, 1884, 9 App. 275. Referred to Western Suburban, &c., Building Society v. Martin, 1886, 17 Q. B. D. 68; Davies v. Second Chatham

[394] crisp v. sir henry edward bunbury, baronet, and others. 1832. [S. C. 1 Moo. & Sc. 646 ; 1 L. J. C. P. 112. Discussed, Morrison v. Glover, 1849, 4 Ex. 442, 444; Reeves v. White, 1852, 17 Q. B. 1015. Referred to, Callaghan v: Dolwin, 1869, L. R, 4 C. P. 294. Distinguished, Prentice v. London, 1875, L. R; 10 C. P. 686. Referred to, Ruckle v. Wilson, 1877, 2 C. P. D. 414. Discussed, Municipal Building Society v. Kent, 1884, 9 App. Gas. 275. Referred to, Western Suburban, &c., Building Society v. Martin, 1886, 17 Q. B. D. 68; Dames v. Second Chatham 446 CRISP V. BUNBUEY 9 BING. 395. Permanent Benefit Building Society, 1889, 61 L. T. 683; Crosfield v. Manchester Ship Canal Company, [1904] 2 Ch. 135; [1905] A. 0. 421.] Since 9 G. 4, c. 92, an action does not lie against the trustee of a savings bank. In case of disputes, the only mode of proceeding is by arbitration. This was an action of assumpsit against the Defendants, as trustees of the Mildenhall bank for savings, for money had and received by them to the. use of the Plaintiff. At the trial before Tindal C. J., Middlesex sittings 1830, a verdict was found for the Plaintiff for 441., subject to the opinion of the Court on the following case ;- In April 1818 a savings bank was established at Mildenhall, in the county of Suffolk, under the provisions of 57 G. 3, c. 130. Eules were drawn up which, in the same year, were duly enrolled with the clerk of the peace, and afterwards acted upon. The Defendants, with others since dead, were duly appointed trustees, and acted as such; but William Newton, who is still living, though not made a Defendant, was also a trustee, and acted. Sir Henry Edward Bunbury, one of the Defendants, who resided at Mildenhall, was also duly appointed, and acted as treasurer, and W. Bassett another of the Defendants, as manager. One William Gill was duly appointed clerk in the year 1818, and continued to act in that capacity until 1825, when it was discovered that he had embezzled a considerable sum of money, the amount of deposits which had been received by him. He absconded, and was prosecuted by the trustees to conviction, and transported. Bassett from time to time received deposits of the Plaintiff, and duly signed his book in which such deposits were regularly entered, but he never saw Crisp's account in the possession of the clerk, or attended at the clerk's office after March 1819; the clerk having told him that he [395] would give him notice when it was necessary for him to attend. On Gill's absconding, Bassett went to his house, and there found two cash account books, one a false and the other a true one; in each of which the Plaintiff's account with the bank was entered, from which it...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
33 cases
  • East Midlands Gas Board v Doncaster Corporation
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • Invalid date
  • Singh v Lall
    • Guyana
    • Court of Appeal (Guyana)
    • 13 December 1977
    ... ... to this remedy or this tribunal and not to others.” ... 21 It seems ... needed, it is to be found in such cases as Crisp v. Bunbury (1832) 8 Bing. 394 ; Crosfield ... ...
  • Healey v Minister of Health
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 10 November 1954
    ...jurisdiction which it has not been given and which the Court cannot create. LORD JUSTICE PARKER 15 Having regard to the decisions in Crisp v. Bunbury (1832) 8 Bingham, page 394, and Crosfield (Joseph) ' Sons Ltd. v. Manchester Ship Canal Company, 1904, 2 Chancery, page 123, it is, I think, ......
  • Moore v Michael Donagher and Patrick Donagher
    • Ireland
    • King's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 15 May 1902
  • Get Started for Free