Ex parte Thomas Chavasse, Isaac Jenks and Williams George Dixon William Joseph Grazebrook, a Bankrupt

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1865
Date01 January 1865
CourtHigh Court of Chancery

English Reports Citation: 46 E.R. 1072

BEFORE THE LORD CHANCELLOR LORD WESTBURY.

Ex parte Thomas Chavasse, Isaac Jenks and Williams George Dixon. In the Matter of William Joseph Grazebrook, a Bankrupt

S. C. 34 L. J. Bk. 17; 11 Jur. (N. S.), 400; 12 L. T. 249; 13 W. R. 627. See The Helen, 1865, L. R. 1 A. & E. 2.

[655] Ex parte thomas chavasse, isaac jenks and william george dixon. B,-/a.In the Matter of william joseph grazebrook, a Bankrupt. Before the Lord Chancellor Lord Westbury. Jan. 18, April 22, 1865. [S. C. 34 L. J. Bk. 17 ; 11 Jur. (N. S.), 400; 12 L. T. 249; 13 W. R. 627. See The Helen, 1865, L. R. 1 A. & E. 2.] A joint adventure between the subjects of a neutral power for running a blockade tDEfi.J. *8.M. BX PARTE CHAVASSE 1073 established by one of two foreign belligerents against the ports of the other with a cargo of arms and ammunition is not an unlawful contract, but one from which the ordinary rights of property result. International law subjects a neutral merchant who transports contraband of war to the risk of having his ship and cargo captured and condemned by the belligerent power for whose enemy the contraband is destined; but the commerce which wasr lawful for the neutral with either belligerent country before the war is not made by the war unlawful or capable of being prohibited by both or either of tho belligerents. If a British shipbuilder builds a vessel of war in an English port, and arms and equips her tor war bond fide on his own account as an article of merchandise, and not under or by virtue of any agreement, understanding or concert with a belligerent power, he may lawfully, if acting bond fide, send the ship so armed and equipped for sale as merchandise in a belligerent country, and will not in so doing violate the provisions or incur the penalties of the Foreign Enlistment Act (39 Go. 3, c. 69). The object of a proclamation is to make known the existing law, and it can neither make nor unmake law. This was an appeal by Thomas Chavaase, Isaac Jenks and William George Dixon, who were the trustees of a deed for the benefit of creditors executed by Horace Chavasse, and registered under the Bankruptcy Act, 1861, s. 192, from the dismissal with costs by Mr. Commisaioner Perry of a petition presented by them in the bankruptcy of William Joseph Grazebrook. The object of the petition was to obtain an apportionment as between the Appellants and the bankrupt's estate of part of the proceeds of a joint venture on the part of tha bankrupt and Horace Chavasse for running the blockade instituted by the Northern against the ports of the Confederate States of America during the late war with a cargo of arms and ammunition. The part of the proceeds in question was represented [656] by a quantity of cotton, in which part of the immediate produce of the venture had been invested. The learned Commissioner held that the joint venture between Horace Chavasse and the bankrupt was illegal, and was impeachablc because the dealings under ifc were illegal or prohibited, and on this ground, as has been stated, dismissed the petition with costs. The present appeal was from that decision. Mr. Daniel, Mr. De Gex and Mr. Thomas Jones appeared for the Appellants; and Mr, Aapinall and Mr. Charles EusselJ, for the Bespondents, the assignees of the bankrupt'^ estate. The judgment of the Lord Chancellor followed in great measure the line of argument on the part of the Appellants, and sufficiently shews the scope of that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • R. v. Caron (G.) et al., 2014 ABCA 71
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • 21 February 2014
    ...R. v. Lefthand (2007), 77 Alta. L.R.(4th) 203; 2007 ABCA 206, refd to. [para. 121]. Ex parte Chavasse (1865), 4 De. G.J. & S. 655; 46 E.R. 1072 (Ct. Ch.), refd to. [para. Campbell v. Hall (1774), Lofft 655; 98 E.R. 1045 (K.B.), refd to. [para. 142]. Ross River Dena Council Band et al. v......
  • (Kelly and Others) v Maguire and O'Sheil
    • Ireland
    • King's Bench Division (Irish Free State)
    • 28 February 1923
    ...... make nor unmake the law: Chevasse, Ex parte (1) . It may be that under the Crimes Act the ......
  • Re Euro Bank Corporation
    • Cayman Islands
    • Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
    • 30 November 2001
    ...(J.) (Leeds) Ltd., In re, [1982] 1 W.L.R. 1177; [1982] 2 All E.R. 882. (6) Chavasse, Ex p., In re GrazebrookENR(1865), 4 De G.J. & S. 655; 46 E.R. 1072; 34 L.J. Bcy. 17. (7) Chun Wo Constr. Co. Ltd., Re, [1991] HKC 445, dicta of Ribeiro J. applied. (8) Curtis v. Perry(1802), 6 Ves. 739; 31 ......
  • Winfat Enterprises (Hk) Co Ltd v Attorney General
    • Hong Kong
    • High Court (Hong Kong)
    • 29 April 1983
    ...(1848) 154 E.R. 450 10 Secretary of State in Council of India v. Kamachee Boye Sahaba (1859) 7 Moo Ind. App. 476 11 Ex parte Chavasse (1865) 46 E.R. 1072 12 Phillips v. Eyre (1870) L.R. 6 Q.B. 1 13 Rustomjee v. The Queen (1876) 2 Q.B.D. 69 14 Bloxam v. Favre (1883) 8 P.D. 101 15 Bloxam v. F......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT