McCombie against Davies
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
| Judgment Date | 11 November 1805 |
| Date | 11 November 1805 |
English Reports Citation: 102 E.R. 1393
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
Explained, Spackman v. Foster, 1883, 11 Q. B. D. 101. Dicta adopted, Fine Art Society v. Union Bank of London, 1886, 17 Q. B. D. 712; Gordon v. London City and Midland Bank [1902], 1 K. B. 265; [1903], A. C. 240.
M'COMBIE against davibs. Friday, June 21st, 1805. Taking the property of' another by assignment from one who had no authority to dispose of it; as taking an assignment of tobacco in the King's warehouse by way of pledge from a broker who had purchased it there in his own name for his principal; and refusing to deliver it to the principal after notice and demand by him; none other than the person in whose name it is warehoused being able to take it out; is a conversion. [Explained, Spademan v. Foster, 1883, 11 Q. B. D. 101. Dicta adopted, Fine Art (a) Vide the observations of Mr. Justice Buller in Roe v. Galliers, 2 Term Rep. 140, upon the case of Doe d. Lord Stanhope v. Skeggs, Tr. 21 Geo. 3, B. K., and vi. Roe d. Gregson v. Harrison, 2 Term Eep. 425. 1394 m'combie v. davies e east, 539. Society v. Union Bank of London, 1886, 17 Q. B. D. 712; Gordon v. London City and Midland Bank [1902], 1 K. B. 265; [1903], A. C. 240.J In trover for a certain quantity of tobacco, tried at the sittings after Michaelmas term 1804, at Guildhall, before Lord Ellenborough C.J. the plaintiff was nonsuited, on the ground that there was no conversion by the defendant. A motion was made in Hilary term last to set aside the nonsuit, and for a new trial, and the opinion of the Court was reserve^ on the following facts : The plaintiff, a merchant in Aberdeen had employed one Coddan, an accredited broker in the tobacco trade, and a dealer in tobacco on his own account, to purchase for him some tobacco, which Coddan accordingly did; and the tobacco in question was part of it. But the defendant had no knowledge of the transaction between the plaintiff and Coddan. Coddan, the broker, bought the tobacco in his own name whilst it was in the King's warehouse, and had it transferred to himself in his own name in the King's warehouse, where it remained subj'ect to the payment of the duties, as is usual till the tobacco is actually delivered out of the warehouse. Coddan being in want of money pledged the tobacco in his own name with the defendant for a sum of money, and transferred it into the defendant's name in the King's warehouse. Afterwards an application was made to the defendant, on the part of the plaintiff, for a delivery of [539] the tobacco in question. The defendant answered, that he had advanced money to Coddan thereon; that he did not know M'Combie, and could not transfer it but to Coddan's order, and not...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Lloyds Bank Ltd v Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China
... ... and the amounts credited to his account by the defendants, he immediately drew cheques against the balance standing to his credit. Of these last mentioned cheques some were in favour of ... As Lord Ellenborough C.J. said in M'Combie v. Davies F53 : “A man is guilty of a conversion who takes my property by assignment from another who has ... ...
-
Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Company (Nos 4 & 5)
...assuming to one's self the property and right of disposing of another's goods …' See too, the judgment of Lord Ellenborough in McCombie v Davies (1805) 7 East 5, 6, where the Chief Justice accepted the submission that apart from any question of possession the assumption of any dominion over......
-
Douglas Valley Finance Company Ltd v S. Hughes (Hirers) Ltd
... ... On a claim by the plaintiffs against the defendants for damages for conversion:— ... Held , (1) that adverse possession by an ... See, too, the judgment of Lord Ellenborough in McCombie v. Davies , F18 where the Chief Justice accepted the submission that apart from any question of ... ...
-
Pickering against Busk and Another, Assignees of Hayward and Another, Bankrupts
...owner. [Bayley, J. That doctrine in its full extent would give the pawnee in all cases a better title than the original proprietor.] (a) 6 East, 538, and 7 East, 5. (b) 6 East, 538. (c) 2 Str. 1178, and vi. Daubigny v. Duval, 5 Term Rep. 604. (d): 5 Teim Rep. 175. 760 PICKERING V. BUSK 15 E......
