John Plummer and William Wilson, Bankrupts
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1841 |
| Date | 01 January 1841 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 41 E.R. 552
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. (sub. nom. Ex parte Shepherd), 2 M. D. & D. 204; See Rolfe v. Flower, 1866, L. R. 1 P. C. 46; 3 Moo. P. C. (N. S.), 391; Midland Banking Co. v. Chambers, 1868, L. R. 7 Eq. 183; Ex parte West Riding Union Banking Co., 1881, 19 Ch. D 116; Ex parte Caldicott, 1884, 25 Ch. D. 719. See also Bankruptey Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), Schedule II. ss. 9-17.
[86] In the Matter of john plummer and willla.m wilson, Bankrupts. Nm . 5, Dec. 8, 1841. [S. C. (sub. nom. Ex parte Shepherd), 2 M. D. & D. 204; See Eolfe v. Flower, lH6(i, L. R. 1 P. C. 46; 3 Moo. P. C. (N. S.), 391; Midland Banking Co. v. Cliambers, 1868, L. R. 7 Eq. 183; Ex parte West Riding Union, hanking Co., 1881, 19 Ch. DJ 116; Ex parte Caldicott, 1884, 25 Ch. D. 719. See also Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Viet. c. 52), Schedule II. ss. 9-17.] A creditor, whose debt was secured by the joint and several covenants of two partners in trade, and also by a mortgage on part of the joint property, admitted to prove his debt against the separate estate of each, without surrendering or realising his mortgage security. This was an appeal, in the form of a special case, from the Court of Review. The material facts, as stated in the case, were that, previously to the issuing of the commission, the bankrupts carried on business in partnership as West India merchants, in the course of which the firm became indebted to George Joad, in the sum of 2000 for monies lent, and in the further sum of ,5998, 13s. 4cl. for the freight of ships, of which Joad was the owner. Being desirous of obtaining further advances, they assigned to Joad certain West India securities belonging to the firm, and entered into joint and several covenants for the payment of the 2000 and any further sum or sums which Joad might afterwards advance to them; and about the same time they gave him a similar security for the payment of the 5998, 13s. 4d., and any further sums in which the firm might afterwards become indebted to him for freight, not exceeding 10,000. The amount due from the firm to Joad, at the time of the bankruptcy, on the first-mentioned security was 10,014, 7s. 5d., and on the other security 10,742, 4s. 5rl., in respect of which two debts he tendered a proof to the commissioners for the gross sum of 20,014, 7s. ~)d., against each of the separate estates of the bankrupts. The commissioners, however...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Liverpool (The) (No. 2)
... ... when proving in the bankruptcy: see for instance re Plummer ( 1 Phillips at page 59) ... 14 So here ... ...
-
Novel Blaze Ltd ((in Liquidation)) v Chance Talent Management Ltd
...Section 9(2) of the Insolvency Act, 2003 Act No. 5 of 2003 interpreted; Re Swiber Holdings Ltd [2018] SGHC 180 applied; Re Plummer (1841) 1 Phillips 56 41 E.R 552 applied; White v Davenham Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 747; Ex parte West Riding Union Banking Co. (1881) 19 Ch D 105 distinguished. 3......
-
Re Civic Constructions Pty Ltd [1971–72] PNGLR 414
...more can by implication effect the surrender of the mortgage security. Re Plummer and Wilson; Ex parte Shepherd (1841) 2 Mont D & De G 204; 41 ER 552; Re Rushton [1971] 2 All ER 937; Harvey v Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd (1937) 58 CLR 382; Re Turner; Ex parte West Riding Union Banking C......