Ravee against Farmer
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1791 |
| Date | 01 January 1791 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 100 E.R. 942
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
15 East, 213. Willes, 270.
ravee against farmer. 1791. An award made upon a reference of all matters in difference between the parties, does not preclude the plaintiff from suing upon a cause of action subsisting against the defendant at the time of the reference, upon proof that the subject-matter of such action was not laid before the arbitrators, nor included in the matters referred.-[15 East, 213. Willes, 270.] This waa an action for money had and received, to recover the proceeds of eighteen bags of red Dutch clover. The defendant pleaded, inter alia, an award; to which the plain-[147]-tiff replied, that the subject-matter of the present action was not included in the reference, &c. on which issue was joined. At the first trial before Lord Kenyon, at the sittings after Easter term last at Guildhall, the plaintiff called one of the two arbitrators to whom the matter had been referred, to prove that this matter had never been laid before them by the parties, and that they had not taken it into their consideration in forming their award; but the defendant's counsel objecting to evidence of this nature, on the ground that the submission to arbitration included all matters in difference between the parties, his Lordship thought he was bound by the terms of the reference, and rejected the witness; upon which the plaintiff was nonsuited. The Court however, in Trinity term last, upon application, set aside the nonsuit; Mr. Justice Buller referring to a case in point determined by this Court in the time of Lord Mansfield (a)2: and upon the causa going down to trial again before Lord Kenyon, the witness was admitted, and the plaintiff obtained the verdict. (a)1 But this judgment was afterwards reversed in Dom. Proc. 3d May, 1796, post, 6 vol. 778. (b) Vid. Say. 245; and 5 Bro. Parl. Cas. 287. (a)2 The case alluded to was Golightly v. Jellicoe, Hil. 9 Geo. 3, B. R. In an action of covenant the defendant took issue on all the breaches; secondly, pleaded a general release, and that those breaches were before the release made; and, thirdly, that an action for some other matter was brought by the plaintiff in Mich. 8 Geo. 3, and all matters in difference referred; that the arbitrator ordered several sums to be paid, and that the parties should give general releases; and that the defendant did pay the money, and the releases...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scott v Bennett
...3 Bing. 382. King v. Birch 3 Q. B. 425. Phillips v. Birch 4 M. & Gr. 405. Lord Bagot v. WilliamsENR 6 T. R. 607. Ravee v. FarmerENR 4 T. R. 146. Preston v. Peeke Ell. Bl. & Ell. 336. Bagot v. WilliamsENR 3 B. & C. 237. Thorpe v. CooperENR 5 Bing. 129. Bartlett v. PentlandENR 1 B. & Ad. 704,......
-
Todd and Bosanquet against Stewart, Emly and Hastings
...v. Williams (3 B. & C. 235), Hadley v. Green (2 C. & J. 374; S. C. 2 Tyrwb. 390), Godson v. Smith (2 B. Moore, 157), Ravee v. Farmer (4 T. R. 146), Thorpe v. Cooper (5 Bing. 116), Lacon v. Barnard (Cro. Car. 35), Green v. Marsh 1470 TODD U.STEWART 9 Q. B. 7M. [764] Rawlinson, in Trinity ter......
-
Smith against Johnson
... ... He relied on Bavee v. Farmer (b), which was decided on the authority of Golightly v. Jellicoe(c), where the Court held that an award made upon a reference of all matters in ... ...
-
Eastmure v Laws
...Court to order a stay of proceedings, [449] if another action should be brought for the amount of the set-off.] But in Mavee v. Farmer (4 T. R. 146), it was held that an award made upon a reference of all matters in difference between the parties did not preclude the plaintiff from suing up......