Ducarry v Gill
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 02 January 1830 |
| Date | 02 January 1830 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 172 E.R. 635
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
S. C. Mood. & M. 450. Referred to, Bramah v. Roberts, 1837, 3 Bing. N. C. 963; Harrison v. Heathorn, 1843, 6 M & G. 81; Ricketts v. Bennett, 1847, 4 C. B. 688.
Jan. 2nd, 1830. ducakbt v. gill. (If A. authorize B. to draw bills upon him, and B. do so, A. is not liable to be sued as the drawer of those bills. By a resolution of the directors of a mining company, four directors were necessary for the doing of any act. Three of the directors were called trustees, and those three gave a power of attorney, to the agent of the company to draw bills .-Held, that the other directors were not liable on those bills, as the power of attorney was not executed by four directors.) [S. C. Mood. & M. 450. Referred to, Bramah v. Roberts, 1837, 3 Bmg. N. C. 963 ; Harrison v. Heathorn, 1843, 6 M & G. 81 ; fackett* v. Bennett, 1847, 4 C. B. 688.J Assumpsit by the plaintiff as indorsee, against the defendant as drawer, of three bdls of exchange. There were also the common money counts. The bills were all in the following form :- " Coquimbo, 17th February, 1826. " Sixty days after sight, pay this our first of exchange (second and third not paid) to Mr. John Le Roi, or order, the sum of £391, 13s. 4d , sterling, arid place the same to the account of the trustees of the Chilian and Peruvian Mining Association. Messrs. Spooner, Attwood, & Co. \ Bankers, London." J [122] These bills were all signed by Captain Andrews, and Captain Bagnold, in their own names. It appeared that the defendant was a director of the Chilian and Peruvian Mining Association ; and that, by a resolution of the directors, four directors were to constitute a board. It also appeared, that Mr. Alderman Thompson, Mr. Attwood, and Mr. Hamlet, were trustees of the Company, they being also directors ; and that Captains Andrews and Bagnold were agents of the Company in South America. And a power of attorney executed by the three trustees to Captains Andrews and Bagnold, was put in ; it was dated, August 1st, 1826 ; and by it, the trustees, for themselves and the other directors, authorized Captains Andrews and Bagnold to employ engineers, and to draw bills on Messrs. Spooner, Attwood, & Co., &c. It was proved by Captain Bagnold, that he, being at Coquimbo, wanted money for the purposes of the Company, and obtained it from the agent of the plaintiff at that place, giving him the bills in question. (a) The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ricketts and Another v Bennett and Field
...establishments, or by the express assent of the party sought to be charged. Observing on this case, and Ducarry v. Gill (M. & M. 450, 4 C. & P. 121), Mr. Collyer says (1st edit. 664, 2nd edit. 791): "In the case of an ordinary trading partnership, the law implies that one partner has author......
-
Bramah and Another v Roberts and Others
... ... The Carolina Bank v. Case (6 B. & C. 427), and Ducarry v. Gill (3 M. & M. 450), recognise the same principle. And the verdict is consistent with the evidence; for there is nothing to shew that the ... ...
-
Ducarrey v Gill
...English Reports Citation: 173 E.R. 1220 IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS Ducarrey and Gill S C with annotations, 4 C & P 121. Guildhall, Jan. 22, 1830. ducarrey v. gill (An agent for an association who draws bills in his own name for the purposes of the company, does not bind ......