Keene v Ward
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 December 1849 |
| Date | 18 December 1849 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 116 E.R. 1359
QUEEN'S BENCH
S. C. 7 D. & L. 334; 19 L. J. Q. B. 46; 14 Jur. 65. Adopted, Haigh v. Ousey, 1857, 7 El. & Bl. 582.
keene against ward. [Tuesday, December 18tb, 1849.] In an action by an attorney for business done, it appeared that he had delivered a bill, utider stat. 6 & 7 Viet. c. 73, s. 37, which contained charges in respect of nine actions in the Court of Exchequer and two in the Court of Common Pleas. The Courts and the parties to these causes were named in the bill. It contained also items in respect of two other actions, each of which appeared to have been in some one of the Superior Courts of Law: as to one of these, the parties were named, in the bill; as to the other, it appeared that the present defendant had (a) See Stwde v. Ward, 3 Lev. 283. (d).6 M. & W. 351, in Exch. Ch., affirming the judgment of the Court of Exchequer. (b) They are continued, by sect. 1, to that day, "and the end of the then next, session of Parliament," unless sooner determined by the Crown. 1360 KBENE V. WARD 13 Q. B. 516. informed plaintiff that an action had been brought against him, defendant, and no more appeared to have been done. The items in respect of actions as to which both parties and Courts were specified, made up the greater part of the whole bill. Held, a sufficient compliance with the statute. [S. C. 7 D. & L. 334; 19 L. J. Q. B. 46 ; 14 Jur. 65. Adopted, Haigh v. Ousey, 1857, 7 El. & Bl. 582.] Debt: (1) for work and labour done as an attorney and solicitor, and materials for the same provided, on defendant's retainer, arid fees payable in respect thereof; (2) for money paid; (3) on an account stated. Pleas: 2. To counts 1 and 2 : that the action was commenced after the coming into operation of stat. 6 & 7 Viet. c. 73; and that plaintiff, under the 1st and 2d counts, seeks to recover the amount of certain fees, charges and disbursements by plaintiff claimed, &c. to be due to him from defendatit for business done and money disbursed by plaintiff as the attorney and solicitor of and for defendant, and not otherwise: and that plaintiff did not, one calender month before commencement, &c., deliver, &c., or send, &c., a bill of such fees, &c., subscribed with the proper hand of plaintiff, &c., pursuant to the statute, &c. Replication. That the plaintiff did, one calendar month, &c., to wit on, &c., deliver to defendant a bill in writing of the said fees, &c., subscribed, &c., as required, &c.: conclusion to the country. Issue thereon. [516] 3. To 3d count: that the account...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ho Cheng Lay v Low Yong Sen
...in any reported decision in Singapore. The courts of England, however, have dealt with this question for a long time. In Keene v Ward (1849) 13 QB 515, Patteson J stated at p 521 In requiring the delivery of an attorney’s bill, the Legislature intended that the client should have sufficient......
-
Ralph Hume Garry (A Firm) v Gwillim
...v Ousey (1857) 7 El. & Bl. 578. I have found it necessary to look at two of the earlier decisions referred to in that case. The first is Keene v Ward (1849) 13 Q.B. 513. That was an action by the solicitors under a bill which contained charges in respect of nine actions in the Court of Exch......