Messenger Newspapers Group Ltd v National Graphical Association
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS,LORD JUSTICE GRIFFITHS,LORD JUSTICE STEPHEN BROWN |
| Judgment Date | 30 November 1983 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1983] EWCA Civ J1130-1 |
| Docket Number | 83/0472 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 30 November 1983 |
[1983] EWCA Civ J1130-1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(Mr. Justice Eastham)
Royal Courts of Justice
The Master of the Rolls
(Sir John Donaldson)
Lord Justice Griffiths
and
Lord Justice Stephen Brown
83/0472
MR. CHARLES R. GARSIDE (instructed by Messrs Cobbetts, Manchester) appeared on behalf of the Respondent/Plaintiff.
MR. TERENCE RIGBY (instructed by Messrs Kershaw, Gassman & Matthews appeared on behalf of the Appellant/Defendant.
MR. HOWARD W.B. PAGE (instructed by Messrs Clifford-Turner) appeared for the Commissioners.
MR. ANTHONY R. BOSWOOD (instructed by Messrs Durrant Piesse) appeared on behalf of Barclays Bank.
I deal first with the position of Messrs Stoy Hayward, the Union's auditors. They have been asked by the sequestrators to give them such information as they have concerning the location, nature and other details of the assets of the Union. That is a proper request and a necessary request if they are to give effect to their duties under the writ of sequestration.
Stoy Hayward have replied to this effect:
"We are concerned that this letter"[the letter from the sequestrators] "seeks information from our clients about the affairs of their clients, National Graphical Association (1982). Our clients are not at the present time authorised by their client to give you the information which you seek, although they have written to them seeking their consent.
We have considered the terms of the Orders sent with Mr. Larkins' letter of 28th November. Our clients hold no property of the National Graphical Association (1982). In those circumstances our clients are unable to satisfy themselves that there is any legal basis for the requests made in the letter of 28th November.
If you disagree with this proposition, perhaps you would set out for us the basis of your contention and we shall consider the matter further."
That letter is dated 29th November and, so far as I know, the sequestrators have not yet had an opportunity of replying to it. But the matter has very properly been brought to our attention and it is right that we should deal with it.
A somewhat similar problem arose in 1972 with the Midland Bank. The Midland Bank were called upon by sequestrators to pay over money, or to give information as to its whereabouts, and they said that they were unable to do so without an express order of the court. The matter came before the court and is reported in the case of Eckman and Others v. Midland Bank Ltd. and another [1973] ICR.71. In a judgment of the court which reviewed the various authorities, at page 80 B I set out the underlying principle:
"In our judgment, the position of a third party in relation to a writ of sequestration is analogous to that of a third party in relation to an injunction, namely, that he is subject to a duty not knowingly to take any action which will obstruct compliance by the sequestrators with the terms of the writ of sequestration which require them to take possession of the assets."
In the context of Eckman's case we were only concerned with a bank which either held monies, or had held monies. There was no way in which the bank could have information, except in one or other of those contexts. But the principle which was being applied was wider. It was, as I say, that no-one should knowingly take any action to obstruct the sequestrators in the execution of their duty and thereby obstruct the court.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Dayani v Bromley London Borough Council
-
A.B. v South West Water Services Ltd
... ... of the Shorthand Notes of The Association of Official Shorthandwriters Limited, Room M104, ... and the master statement of claim in the group action allege a number of different causes of ... government is as much government as national government, and the police and many other persons ... News Group Newspapers [1986] Q.B. 256 at page 277 in the judgment ... ...
-
Golden Season Pte Ltd and others v Kairos Singapore Holdings Pte Ltd and another
...1 SLR 639 (refd) Lynch v Knight (1861) 9 HLC 577; 11 ER 854 (refd) Messenger Newspapers Group Ltd v National Graphical Association [1984] 1 All ER 293 (refd) Mohamed Hussain v Chew How Yang Eddie [1995] 1 SLR (R) 916; [1995] 3 SLR 177 (refd) M'Pherson v Daniels (1829) 10 B & C 263; 109 ER 4......
-
Basil Anthony Herman v Premier Security Co-operative Ltd
... ... Sung [2003] HKEC 727 (refd) Messenger Newspapers Group Ltd v National Graphical ... Group Ltd v National Graphical Association [1984] IRLR 397 and Collins Stewart v The ... ...
-
Tort Law
...Ltd[2010] 3 SLR 110 but not fully determined. Wei JC explained that Messenger Newspapers Group Ltd v National Graphical Association[1984] 1 All ER 293 (‘Messenger Newspapers Group’), which purportedly awarded aggravated damages to a corporate plaintiff, can be distinguished as it was based ......