Larchin v Willan
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1838 |
| Date | 01 January 1838 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 150 E.R. 1463
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 7 Dowl. P. C. 11; 1 H. & H. 332; 8 L. J. Ex. 19; 2 Jur. 970.
[351] laroeun v. weli-an. Kxch. of Pleas. 18,'W.-The principle by which the Judges will be guided iu allowing an arrest under the 1 & 2 Viet. c. 110, s. ; , is to consider whether the defendant is about to leave the country for such a time that he is not likely to bo forthcoming to satisfy the plaintiffs execution at the period when he will be entitled to it in the ordinary course of law proceedings. -It was therefore held to be a sufficient ground for issuing the writ, that the defendant, an officer, in the army, was about to join his regiment stationed abroad. [H. C. 7 Howl. F. O. 11 ; I H. & H. 332 ; 8 L. J. Ex. 19 ; 2 Jur. 970.] ; Butt nioved for a rule to shew cause why an order made by (iurney, I!., under the E I & 2 Viet. c. 110, s. .'!, for arresting the defendant, should not be set aside, and why the bail-bond given in pursuance thereof should not be delivered up to be cancelled. It appeared from the affidavits, that the defendant had been arrested on a writ of capiaa ad respondendum at the suit of the plaintiff', previously to the 1st of October last. On that day, the plaintiff made an ex parte application to a judge for an order to detain him under the new statute, on an affidavit that the defendant was an officer in the army, that his regiment was stationed in Ireland, and that ho (the plaintiff) believed the defendant was about to leave this country. The defendant at the same time took out a summons to shew cause why he should not be discharged, on an affidavit stating that he was a captain in the 17th Foot, that bis regiment was abroad, that he was in this country on official business, and had no intention of going abroad with a view of avoiding the payment of his debts, but was going into Ireland in obedience to the commands of his superiors, and in pursuance of his duty, &c. These two summonses came on to be heard together before (Joltman, J., who, after conferring with Tindal, (J. J. held the explanation given in the defendant's affidavit to be sufficient, 1464 JACKSON -l . COOPKK 4 M. & W. 352. and directed his discharge. The order for his arrest was however subsequently made by:Guriiey, B,, and a bail-bond taken. Butt contended that the proper construction of the 1 & 2 Viet. c. 110, s. 3, was, that, in order to justify an arrest, the defendant must be about to leave England with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Underhill v Devereux
...it in the ordinary course of law proceedings; as in the instance of an officer in the Army about to join his regiment stationed abroad. 4 M. & W. 351, Larchin v. Willan. It is not requisite that the party to be arrested should be domiciled, or have his usual place of abode, in England. 3 G.......
-
Hamilton & Company v Coningham
...429. Crowe's CaseELR 22 Q. B. D. 422. Ex parte KosterELR 14 Q. B. D. 597. Hood Barrs v. HeriotELR [1896] A. C. 174. Larchin v. WillanENR 4 M. & W. 351. Morgan v. EyreUNK 20 L. R. Ir. 541. Picton v. CullenIR [1900] 2 I. R. 612. Re WatsonELR [1893] 1 Q. B. 21. Scotland v. CunninghamIR [1899] ......
-
Louis Stein and Adolphe Stein against Maurice Valkenhuysen
...as these. A rule Nisi being granted, T. Jones (of the Northern Circuit) shewed cause in the first instance. In Larchin v. Lilian (4 M. & W. 351) the rule is laid down that if the defendant is about to leave the kingdom for some very temporary purpose the case is not within the statute : but......