Leader and Another v Rhys
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 02 May 1861 |
| Date | 02 May 1861 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 142 E.R. 495
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND IN THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 30 L. J. C. P. 345; 4 L. T. 330; 7 Jur. N. S. 1199; 9 W. R. 704: at Nisi Prius, 2 F. & F. 399. See M'Grath v. Bourne, 1876, L. R. 10 C. L. 164; Serrao v. Noel, 1885, 15 Q. B. D. 553.
IOC. B. (H. S.)36. LEADER V. RHYS 495 [369] leader and another v. beys. May 2nd, 1861. [S. C. 30 L. J. C. P. 345 ; 4 L. T. 330 ; 7 Jur. N. S. 1199 ; 9 W. G. 704 : at Nisi Prius, 2 F. & F. 399. See M'Gmth v. flwwe, 1876, I. R. 10 C. L. 164 ; Seirao v. Nod, 1885, 15 Q. B. D. 553.] iq an action for the hire of two pianos, with a count in detinue for the pianos themselves, the defendant paid into court the amount due for tho hire, attd (after the commencement of tie action) delivered up the pianos. At the trial, the jury found that the value of the pianos was 1301., and gave a verdict for the plaintiff for Is. damages on the count in detinue :-Held, that the plaintiff was entitled to costs, under the 14 & 15 Viet. c. 54, s. 4, the cause of action, at the time of ita commencement, not being one for which a plaint could have been entered in the county-court. This was an action for goods sold and delivered and for the hire of goodsj with a count in detinue for two pianofortes. The writ was issued on the 10th of December, 1860 r on the 30th, the pianofortes were returned; and on the 2nd of January, 1861, the defendant paid into court 61. 10s. 6d., a sum sufficient for the hire of the pianofortes. At the trial before Byles, J., at the sittings at Westminster after last term, the jury found that the value of the pianofortes was 1301. ; and they returned a verdict for the plaintiff with Is. damages for their detention. The learned judge was aaked to certify to give the plaintiff's costs; but no particular statute was referred to. Ho declined to certify. Parry, Serjt. (with whom was Lucius Kelly) now moved for an order that the plaintiff recover his costs, under the 4th section of the 15 & 16 Viet. c. 54. That section repeals the 13th section of the 13 & 14 Viet. c. 61, and enacts, that, "in any action in which the plaintiff shall not be entitled to recover his costs by reason of the provisions of the llth section of such act(.), whether there be a verdict in such action or [370] not, if the plaintiff shall make it appear to the satisfaction of the court in which such action was brought, or to the satisfaction of a judge at Chambers, upon summons, that such action was brought for a cause in which concurrent jurisdiction is given to the superior courts by the l!28th section of the 9 & 10 Viet. c. 95, or for which no plaint could have been entered in any such county-courts, or that such action was removed from a county-court by certiorari, or that there was sufficient reason for bringing such action in the court in which such action was brought,-then and in any of such case^, the court in which such action is brought, or the said judge at Chambers, ahall thereupon, by rule or order, direct that the plaintiff' shall recover his costs that he would bjave had if the before-mentioned act of the 13 & 14 Viet. c. 61, had not been passeoL" This was a cause of action for which no plaint could have been entered in the coanf;y-caurt, the value of the articles sought to be recovered being, as found by the jury, 1301.; whereas, the jurisdiction of the county-court in detinue is limited (a) Which enacts, " that, if in any action commenced after the passing of this act in any of Her Majesty's superior courts of record, in covenant, debt, detinue, or assumpsit, not being an action for breach of promise of marriage, the plaintiff shall recover a sum not exceeding 201., or if, in any action commenced after the passing of this act in any of Her Majesty's superior courts of record, in trespass, trover, or case, not being an action for malicious prosecution, or for libel, or for slander, or for criminal conversation, or for seduction, the plaintiff shall recover a sum not exceeding 51., the plaintiff shiill have judgment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McGrath v Bourne
...MyersENR 6 H. & N. 54. Sears v. LyonsENR 2 Starkie, 317. Berry v. Da CostaELR L. R. 1 C. P. 335, 336, per Keatinge, J. Leader v. RhysENR 2 F. & F. 399. Moon v. RaphaelENR 2 Bing. N. C. 310. Campbell v. Evans 6 Ir. Jur. (O. S.) 243. Williams v. ArcherENR 5 C. B. 318. Leader v. RhysENR 2 F. &......