Ex parte Deeze
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 08 June 1748 |
| Date | 08 June 1748 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 26 E.R. 146
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Followed, In re Witt, ex parte Shubrook, 1876, 2 Ch. D. 491.
Case 125.-Ex parte deeze. June 8th, 1748. [Followed, In re Witt, ex parte Shubrook, 1876, 2 Ch. D. 491.] A packer may retain goods till he is paid the price of packing, and if he has another debt due to him from the same person, the goods shall not be taken from him till he has paid the whole, notwithstanding the debtor is become a bankrupt. Mr. Norton Nicholls, a merchant, borrowed of the petitkmer the sum of 500 for which he gave a note of hand, afterwards he sent the petitiOTier, who was a packer, six bales of cloth to pack and press ; some time after Nicholls paid off a part of the 500 and interest for the remainder, and then asked the petitioner if he would have the whole paid off, which the petitioner declined, and then the old note was delivered up, and a new one given for the remainder : before the remainder was paid, and before the six bales were taken out of the petitioner's custody, Nicholls became a bankrupt, and it was agreed between the petitioner, and the assignees of Nicholls under the [229] commission, that it should be determined in a summary way, upon a petition to Lord Chancellor, whether the petitioner could retain the six bales till his whole debt was satisfied. N.B. There were no goods in the hands of the petitioner, when he first lent the money, nor had there been dealings between them for many years. It also appeared there was, at the time of the bankruptcy, 19 due to Deeze for the packing tind pressing these bales, and there was due from Deeze to Nicholls near that sum for wine. Lord Chancellor. I am of opinion that under the circumstances of the present case, the assignees have not a right to take those goods from the petitioner, without making him a satisfaction for his whole debt. Notwithstanding the rules of law as to bankrupts reduce all creditors to an equality, 1ATK.230. EX PARTE PRESCOT 147 yet it is hard where a man has a debt due from a bankrupt, and has at the same time goods of a bankrupt in his hands, which cannot be got from him without the assistance of law or equity, that the assignees should take them from him without satisfying the whole debt. And therefore the clause in the act of parliament of the 5 Geo. 2, relating to mutual credit, has received a very liberal construction, and there have been many cases which that clause has been extended to where an action of account...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
James Young and Others, - Appellants; The Bank of Bengal, - Respondents
...cited the following authorities: Anon. 1 Mod. 215; Chapman v. Derby, 2 Vern. 117: Heii'ison v. Guthrie, 2 Bing. N.C. 755; Exparte Deeze, 1 Atk. 228; Exparte Ockenden, 1 Atk. 235 ; Green v. Farmer, 4 Burr. 2214; Exparte Prescott, 1 Atk. 230; Collins v. Jones, 10 B. and C. 777; Hankey v. Smit......
-
James Young, and Others, - Appellants; The Bank of Bengal, - Respondent
...power of sale. The case that has created the greatest confusion on the subject of set-off in Bankruptcy is that of Ex parte Deeze (1 Atk. 228). In that case, a Packer had a small demand against a Bankrupt for packing goods, and also a much larger demand against him for money lent; and the B......
-
Toll Logistics (Nz) Ltd v Andrew John McKay and John Joseph Cregten Coa
...ER 86 at 8788 (KB). 14 At 61 per Stephen J. To similar effect, see Laws of New Zealand Lien (online edition) at [2]. 15 Ex parte Deeze (1748) 1 Atk 228, 26 ER 146 16 Ex parte Ockenden (1754) 1 Atk 235, 26 ER 151. 17 Green v Farmer (1746–1779) 1 Black W 651, 96 ER 379; (1768) 4 Burr 2214, 98......
-
Toll Logistics (nz) Limited v Andrew John Mckay and John Joseph Cregten Coa
...103 ER 86 at 8788 (KB). At 61 per Stephen J. To similar effect, see Laws of New Zealand Lien (online edition) at [2]. Ex parte Deeze (1748) 1 Atk 228, 26 ER 146 Ex parte Ockenden (1754) 1 Atk 235, 26 ER 151. [23] Ex parte Ockenden did not involve packers. Lord Hardwicke declined to recognis......