Ness v Armstrong
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Exchequer |
| Judgment Date | 30 May 1849 |
| Date | 30 May 1849 |
English Reports Citation: 154 E.R. 1108
IN THE EXCHEQUER
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...
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
-
Re The Northumberland and Durham District Banking Company Luard's Case
...them 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 ......
-
Bosanquet, Public Officer, & v Shortridge
...coses may result froin their application This is the case of a joint-stock Company regulated by deed 4 EX. TO GINGELL, v. PURKINSNe^ v Ani^ttimg (4 Exch 21), are authorities to .shew that the Company could not sue Thew Ex paite A[oi gan, In the, Mattel oj the Vale of Nadh B\ewery (I Mau &am......
-
Heward v Wheatley
...the right of the creditor to come in in the suit without proving that the other remedies had .been exhausted. [They cited Ness v. Armstrong (4 Exch. 21), Ness v. Angas (3 Exch. 805), Bicketts v. Eowhay (3 C. B. 889, 905), Bank of England v. Johnson '(3 Exch. 598), Bank of Scotland v. Fenwic......
-
The West Cornwall Railway Company against Mowatt
...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 ......
