Diplock v Hammond The Guardians of the Poor of St. Mary's, Newington, v Hammond
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 16 February 1854 |
| Date | 16 February 1854 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 65 E.R. 339
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. affirmed, 5 De G. M. & G. 320; 43 E. R. 893 (with note to which add Brandt's Sons & Company v. Dunlop Rubber Company [1905], A. C. 462).
2 SM. & GIFF. 141, DIP1O0K V. HAMMOND 339 [141] diplock v. hammond. the guardians of the poor of st. mary's, newtngton, v. hammond. Feb. 16, 1854. [S. C. affirmed, 5 De G. M. & G. 320; 43 E. E. 893 (with note to which add Brandt's Sons & Company v. Dunlop EuVber Company [1905], A. C. 462).] A., having obtained a loan from B., gave him the following instrument, addressed to his (A.'s) debtor:-" I hereby authorise you to pay B. 365, being the amount of my contract, B. having advanced me that sum." (Signed) "A." Held, a valid equitable assignment, and not requiring a stamp as an order for payment of money under 55 Geo. 3, o. 184. Where the stakeholder alleged that the fund in his hands was less than one of the claimants asserts to be the amount, a bill of interpleader cannot be maintained. Nor where, before it was filed, one of the claimants had informed the stakeholder that he would file a bill to enforce his demand; and did in fact file his bill on the same day with the interpleader bill, making the only other claimant and the stakeholder parties. The Defendant, George Hammond, previously to October 1852, contracted with the Guardians of the Poor of St. Mary's, Newington, to construct certain works in connection with the poorhouse, for a sum of 365. From the 16th of October to the 1st of February 1853 Hammond, with the knowledge of Joseph Burgess, the clerk of the guardians, obtained from Diplock a loan exceeding 365; and on the 1st of February 1853 Diplock received from Hammond the following document:- "To the Governors and Guardians of St. Mary, Newington. " Walworth, February 1st, 1853.-Gentlemen,-I hereby authorise you to pay to -Mr. John Diplock, of the Walworth Road, the sum of 365, being the amount of my contract at the new workhouse, Walworth Villa, Mr. Diplock having advanced me that sum.-I remain, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, " george hammond." At the same time Hammond delivered to the Plaintiff a stamped receipt, as follows:- "London.-Received of the Governors and Guardians of St. Mary, Newington, the sum of 365, for work done as per contract at the new workhouse, Walworth Villa. " george hammond." "365." On the following day the Plaintiff gave notice to the clerk of the guardians of the assignment to the Plaintiff of the amount due from them...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Adams v Morgan
...is available ; it is also taken out of the 48th (1) 2 Brod. & Bing. 78. (2) 13 Sim. 271. (3) 9 Ad. Ss Ell. 375. (4) 6 Hare 261. (5) 2 Sm. & Giff. 141 ; 5D. G. M. & G. 320. (2) 3 Q. B. Div. 569. (3) L. R. 17 Eq. 109. (4) 3 Q. B. D. 686. (5) 27 W. R. 301. 6 LAW REPORTS (IRELAND). [L. R. I. Ex......
-
Diplock v Hammond
...English Reports Citation: 43 E.R. 893 BEFORE THE LORDS JUSTICES. Diplock and Hammond S. C. 2 Sm. & G. 141; 23 L. J. Ch. 550; 2 W. R. 500. Distinguished, Ex parte Shellard, 1873, L. R. 17 Eq. 109. [320] diplock v. hammond. Before the Lords Justices. May 31, 1854. [S. C. 2 Sm. & G. 141; 23 L.......
-
Best v Hayes
...parts of the money ? In Glyn v. Due&ury the two debts were originally and substantially different in their nature] In Diplock v. Hammond (2 Sm. & G. 141) it was held a fatal objection that the plaintiff in the interpleader suit called upon the defendants to mterplead as to a less sum tfhan ......
-
Re John Farrell; ex parte George D. Fottrell
...690. Lestrange v. LestrangeENR 13 Beav. 281. Letts v. MorrisENR 4 Sim. 607. Yeates v. Groves 1 Ves. jun. 280. Diplock v. HammondENRENR 2 Sm. & G. 141; S. C., 5 De G., M. & G, 320. M'Gawen v. Smith 26 Law Jour., Ch., 8. Ex parte South 3 Swanst. 392. Ryall v. RowlesUNK 2 W. & T., L. C., 615. ......