Morrell v Tinkler
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1852 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 68 E.R. 786
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
reference to accountants or persons of science. morrell v. tinkler. Dec. 3, 1852. Where, in a suit referred to the Master, it is desired to obtain the advantage of the new powers conferred upon the Court by the recent statutes, the proper course is to apply for the transfer of the proceedings to the Judge in Chambers. The statutes do not give the Court power to authorise the Master to avail himself of their provisions. The Plaintiff was the surviving partner and the executor and trustee of the testator. The bill was filed to have the partnership [li] accounts taken ; and a decree had been made in the cause, directing the usual reference to the Master to take the accounts. The partnership had been in the business of bankers, and extended over a period of thirty-one years. Mr. Eolt and Mr. Beavan appeared in support of the petition of the Plaintiff, that the accounts and inquiries which had been ordered to be taken and made by the Master might, in lieu thereof, be ordered to be prosecuted and made before the Judge in Chambers. The parties were desirous of availing themselves of the proceeding authorised by the statute 15 & 16 Viet. c. 80, sect. 42, by which the Court might obtain the assistance of an accountant, and this appeared to be the right course of proceeding for that purpose. They cited Mildmay v. Methuen, before Vice-Chancellor Kindersley, 8th Nov. 1852. the vice-chancellor [Sir G. J. Turner] made the order as asked, observing that he had no power to authorise the Master to employ an accountant; but that, by having the prosecution of the decree transferred according to the prayer of the petition, the matter would be brought before a jurisdiction able to avail itself of the new powers conferred upon the Court by the statute. It had been held that the Act did not give the Master such jurisdiction. An architect and builder, having claimed to be a creditor of the testator in an administration suit, for a large amount, in respect of rebuilding a mansion-house, and the Master having made a separate report of the claim, the Court gave the creditor leave to bring an action. After the New Procedure Act came into operation the creditor applied for a reference back to the Master, giving him power to call in the assistance of a builder and surveyor, under the 42d section of the stat. 15 & 16 Viet. c. 80. The Court held that it was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial