Gremaire v Le Clerc Bols Valon
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 29 May 1809 |
| Date | 29 May 1809 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 170 E.R. 1110
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
Disapproved, Cope v Rowlands, 1836, 2 M & W 149
1110 GREMAIEE V. VALON 2 CAMP. 144. Monday, May 29, 1809 gremaire r le clerc Bois valon (Sembte, that notwithstanding 3 Hen VIII c II, which enacts, that no one shall practise as a surgeon in London, or seven miles round, without being licensed by the college of surgeons, under the penalty of 5 a month , a person who is not so licensed may maintain an action for business done as a surgeon within these limits, the statute containing no prohibitory clause And at any rate, it is incumbent upon the defendant in such action to give evidence, that the plaintiff is not regularly licensed as the statute directs ) [Disapproved, Cope v Rowlands, 1836, 2 M & W 149 ] Indebitatus assumpstt for work and labour, &c. Plea, the general issue It appeared that the parties to this suit are both French emigrant priests, resident in London, and that the plaintiff had cured the defendant of the lues renetea after a long attendance, in the course of which he had applied medicines to external sores, and performed several surgical operations. An acknowledgment by the defendant was given in evidence, that for this cure he owed the plaintiff 20 [144] Clifford for the defendant contended, that the action could not be maintained, a* the plaintiff was not a member of the college of surgeons. By statute 3 Hen. VIII. c. 11. s 1, it was enacted, that to prevent smiths, weavers, and women, who took upon themselves great cures, in which they used sorcery and witchcraft, from intermeddling with surgery, no one within the city of London, or seven miles round, should act as a surgeon, without being examined and admitted in the manner therein pointed out, under the pain of forfeiture of 5 for every month any person should so act as a surgeon And although by 34 and 35 Hen VLII c 8, s 3, liberty was given to any person having knowledge and experience of the nature of herbs, roots, and waters, &c to [145] practice, use, and minister, in and to any outward sore, uncome, wound, &c any herbs, ointment, c according to their cunning, experience, and knowledge , it was clear from the preamble to the statute, that this must be done gratuitously , the grievance there stated being, that " the company and fellowship of surgeons of London, minding only their own lucres, had sued, troubled, and vexed divers honest persons, whom God had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hemlata Pathela (trading as Coco Properties) v Suresh Partabrai and Another
...the housing agent who does not obtain a licence to carry on his business as such. Mr Low may have overlooked the case of Gremaire v Valon 2 Camp 143; 170 ER 1110 cited in Cope v Rowlands (1836) 2 M & W 149; 150 ER 707 which Mr Assomull referred to at the hearing. It is not a point of any si......