Ness v Armstrong

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date30 May 1849
Date30 May 1849
CourtExchequer

English Reports Citation: 154 E.R. 1108

IN THE EXCHEQUER

Ness
and
Armstrong

S C 7 D & L 73, 17 L J Ex 473, 13 Jur 874 Distinguished, In re Agaculturst Cattle Insurance Company, Band's case, 1870, L R 5 Ch Ap 725 Reterred to, Ness v. Bertram, p 196, post, Houldsworth v. Evans, 1868, L R 3 H L 283

[21] in the exchequer ness v armstrong May 30, 1849 -The deed of settlement of a joint-stock banking copartnership, established under the 7 (reo 4, c 4fi, provided that the executor of a deceased shareholder should not be a member of the Company in respect of such shares, but should be at liberty to sell the shares, or at his option to become a member on complying with ceitam provisions, and that, if he did not elect to become a member, he was not to be entitled to any dividend accruing due after the testator's death -Held, that the executor of a deceased shareholder who received a dividend which accrued clue after the death of his testator, but had not complied with the provisions of the deed of settlement, was not a member for the purpose of execution against him by scire facias on a judgment against the public officer of the Company [H C 7D & L 7J, 18 L J Ex 473, f3 Jui 874 Distinguished, In le Agncul-tun^t C'uttle Iiikiuance Company, Hand\ caw, 1870, L II 5 Ch Ap ll'i Ketened to, Ares,s v Be-ttjuni, p 1%, post, Houhlxwoitk v Kians, 1S68, L It 3 il L 28J ] Scire facias against the defendant on a judgment obtained against the public officer of the North of England Joint-stock Banking Company The scire facias alleged that the defendant, at the time of the issuing of the writ, was a member of the Company That allegation was traversed by the plea, upon which issue was joined At the trial, before Cresswell, J, at the last Northumbeiland Summei Assizes, EX. 32. NESS V. ARMSTRONG 1109 it appeared that the defendant was executor, and had proved the will, of one Hedley, ;who at his decease, in May, 1844, was a duly registered shareholder in the North of ;Englaud Joint-stock Banking Company. The defendant, since the death, uad received one dividend in respect of his testator's shares, but he had done no other act to make :himself a shareholder. In the Stamp-Office return of 1845, Hedley's shares were ^described as belonging to Hedley's executor. The deed of settlement of the Company ;waa in evidence, the 28th clause of which provides/??) that the executor of any deceased Isnareholder shall not he a member of the Company in respect of such shares, but he ^shall be at...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • East of England Banking Company ex parte Isaac Bugg
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 1 January 1865
    ...be questioned. 694 EX PARTJS BUGG 2 DR. & SM. 456. Dodgson. v. Bell (5 Exch:. 967); Luard'scase (1 Deg. F. & J. 533); Ness v. Armstrong (4 Exch. 21); Straffm's Executors' case (1 De G. M. & G. 576); dements-?. Todd (1 Exeh. 268); Cheltenham Railway Company v. Daniel (2 Q. B. 281); (?rac v. ......
  • Re The Northumberland and Durham District Banking Company Luard's Case
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 5 March 1860
    ...contributories has succeeded. Dodyson v. Bell pro-[542]-ceeds expressly on the ground that the husband was not a member; Ness v. Armstrong (4 Exch. 21) ou the ground that the executor was not a member, but Armstrong was nevertheless put on the list of contributories and retained there on ap......
  • Bell, one of the public Officers of the National Provincial Bank of England v Fisk
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Common Pleas
    • 1 May 1852
    ...and carrying on business under the 7 G. 4, c. 46, must proceed against the public officer, under s. 9. But in Wills v. Sutherland, 4 Exch. 21 i, it was held upon a statute (4 & 5 Viet. c. xciii.) the words of which are the same as those of the banking act, that the secretary may sue for bre......
  • The West Cornwall Railway Company against Mowatt
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the Queen's Bench
    • 4 June 1850
    ...his alleged [627] assumption of that character ; and he thereby incurred no liability ; Ness v. Angus (3 Exch, 805), Ness v. Armstrong (4 Exch. 21). This illegal stipulation is the whole consideration for the defendant's contract to become shareholder, and cannot therefore be treated as an ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT