Owen v Challis
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 12 May 1848 |
| Date | 12 May 1848 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 136 E.R. 1195
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
[115] owen v. challis. May 12, 1848. A special plea to an action of assumpsit for money had and received, wherein the defendant disputes all the facts from which the legal inference arises that the money was money had and received to the use of the plaintiff,-is bad, as amounting to non assumpsit.-Plea,-that, before the passing of the companies' winding-up act, 9 & 10 Viet. c. 28, a railway company had been projected, with a certain amount of capital; that the defendant and others.had the management of the undertaking; that shares therein were allotted to the plaintiff, at his request; that the defendant and the rest of the committee received from the plaintiff the deposit upon such shares; that the plaintiff and the defendant and others entered into an agreement of partnership for carrying the undertaking into effect, and that the action was brought to recover the amount of the deposit so paid, by reason of the undertaking not being prosecuted for a time which the plaintiff alleged to be unreasonable; that meetings were held according to the provisions of the act, at which meetings the company or partnership was dissolved, and the undertaking abandoned; that the plaintiff's claim in the action was part of the affairs of the company to be wound up as aforesaid; and that the affairs of the company had not been wound up, nor had a reasonable time elapsed for winding up the same :-Held, tlr.it the facts stated in the plea,-being set forth to shew that the money sought to be recovered never was received by the defendant to the use of the plaintiff, -amounted to an argu mentative traverse of the implied promise alleged in the declaration, and was therefore bad. . Assumpsit for money had and received. Pleas, that, before the passing of the statute 9 & 10 Viet. c. 28, intituled "An act to facilitate the dissolution of certain railway companies," a certain prospectus had been issued for the' promotion of a certain intended partnership for carrying into effect an undertaking for constructing a railway, to be called the Direct Western Railway, which could not be constructed without the authority of parliament, and that no act of parliament had been obtained for that purpose; that, by the said prospectus, the defendant and several other named persons were declared to be a provisional committee; that it was also thereby declared that the capital should consist of a certain amount therein mentioned, to be divided in the number of shares therein also mentioned; that the allottees of such shares should pay 21. 12s. 6d. upon each share allotted; that the defendant and other members of the provisional committee [116] had the management of the undertaking; that, afterwards, at the request of the plaintiff, twenty, shares, were allotted to him; and that the defendant and the rest of the committee received from him 21. 12s. 6d. upon each share. The plea further stated that the plaintiff and the defendant, and divers other persons, entered into an agreement of partnership for carrying the said undertaking into effect; and that the 21. 12s. 6d. per share upon the twenty shares allotted to the plaintiff, making 521. 10s., so-paid by the plaintiff...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dicker v Jackson
...this rule be correctly laid down, as we think it is, it demonstrates that the (a) Wilde, C. J., Coltman, J., Maule, J., and V. Williams, J. 6 C. B.115. OWEN V. CHALIAS 1195 performance of this part of the contract by the plaintiff is not a consideration precedent to his right to maintain th......