Rees v Berrington
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 28 April 1795 |
| Date | 28 April 1795 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 30 E.R. 765
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. 2 Wh. & T. L. C. (7th ed.), 568. See Tyson v. Cox. 1823, Turn. & Russ. 399; Petty v. Cook, 1871, L. R. 6 Q. B. 794; Phillips v. Foxall. 1872, L. R. 7 Q. B. 675; Wulff v. Jay, 1872, L. R. 7 Q. B. 764; Grant v. Budd, 1874, 30 L. F. 320; Polak v. Everett, 1876. 1 Q. B. D. 673; Holme v. Brunskill, 1878, 3 Q. B. D. 505; Bolton v. Salmon [1891], 2 Ch. 54.
rees v. berrington. April 28th, 1975. [S. G. 2 Wh. & T. L. C. (7th ed.), 568. See Tyson v. Cox. 1823, Turn. & Russ. 399 ; Petty v. Cook, 1871, L. R. 6 Q. B. 794 ; Phillips v. Foxall. 1872, L. R. 7 Q. B. 675; Wulff v. Jay, 1872, L. R. 7 Q. B. 764; Grant v. Budd, 1874, 30 L. F. 320; Polak v. Everett, 1876. 1 Q. B. D. 673; Holme v. Brunskill, 1878, 3 Q. B. D. 505; Bolton v. Salmon [1891], 2 Gh. 54.] Obligee in a bond with a surety without communication with the surety takes notes from the principal, and gives farther time : the surety is discharged. Thomas, Daniel, and Richard Blachford carried on business as lacemen in partnership till the death of Thomas. On taking the accounts a balance of 2972, 3s. 5d. appeared to be due from the partnership to Robert Pope Blachford, as administrator of Thomas; to secure which sum and 466, 13s. id. agreed to be secured to Robert Pope Blachford as Thomas's share of the debts due to the partnership a joint and several bond'dated September 31st, 1787, was executed by the surviving partners, and by James Bees as surety, with condition to be void on payment of the said sums with interest by instalments upon the 31st of December 1789, and the 31st of December 1790. In the beginning of September 1790 Robert Pope Blachford died. Upon the 766 REES V. BERRINGTON 2 YES. JUN. 541. 27th of September 1790, the whole of the money and interest secured by the bond remaining unpaid, James M'Kemie under the authority and on behalf of the executors of Robert Pope Blachford came to an arrangement with Daniel and Richard Blachford concerning the money due on the bond and the interest; and for the first instalment due on the bond took their promisory notes payable on the 21st of April, 21st of July, and 21st of October 1791, and the 21st of January, and 21st of April 1792; and for the second instalment to become due upon the bond, took three other promisory notes payable on the 21st of July, and 21st of October 1792, and the 21st of January 1793. Daniel and Richard Blachford at different times on and before the 18th of October 1792, paid to the executors of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Associated British Ports v (1) Ferryways Statenv (2) Msc Belgium N.v
...the surety. Thus in Polak v Everett (1876) 1 QBD 669 Blackburn J said: It has been established for a very long time, beginning with Rees v Berrington to the present day, without a single case going to the contrary, that on the principles of equity a surety is discharged when the creditor, w......
- Citibank NA v Ooi Boon Leong and Others
-
SRI Apparel Ltd v Revolution Workwear Ltd and Others
...LAW 2001 PARA 21.97 MOODY v COX & HATT 1917 2 CH 71 POLAK v EVERETT 1876 1 QBD 669 HOLME v BRUNSKILL 1878 3 QBD 495 REES v BERRINGTON 30 ER 765 1795 2 VES JR 540 BANK OF INDIA v TRANS CONTINENTAL COMMODITY MERCHANTS LTD & PATEL 1982 1 LLOYDS 506 BANK OF MONTREAL v WILDER 149 DLR (3D) 193 DA......
-
Bailey and Others v Edwards
... ... [They cited Poaley v. Harradine (7 E. & B. 431); Strmig v. Fouler (17 C. B. 201, 219), per Williams J.; Rees v. Berrington (2 Ves. Jun. 540, 543), per Lord Loughborough ; Ex parle Glendinning (Buck's Ca. in Bankruptcy, 517, 519-520), per Lord Eldon ; Smith ... ...