The Queen against The Committee Men for the South Holland Drainage
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 15 November 1838 |
| Date | 15 November 1838 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 112 E.R. 901
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH
S. C. 1 P. & D. 79; 1 W. W. & H. 647; 8 L. J. Q. B. 64. Referred to, R. v. Surrey JJ., 1870, L. R. 5 Q. B. 473; R. v. Sheward, 1880-82, 5 Q. B. D. 182; 9 Q. B. D. 741.
the queen against the committee men for the south holland drainage, Thursday, November 15th, 1838. On application for a certiorari, the Court will take into consideration the conduct of the party applying. A party, whose land had been taken under the South Holland Drainage Act (57 G-. 3, c. Ixix.), applied for a certiorari to bring up the inquisition held before a compensation jury on the grounds, 1. That the inquisition did not state such a notice to treat for compensation as was requisite under the Act to give jurisdiction ; 2. That the jury had ordered a fence to be erected for the benefit of the applicant, in addition to a money compensation, instead of giving him the whole compensation in money ; 3. That the applicant held in right of his wife, and that the tenure was copyhold, and no compensation was made to the wife or lord. This Court refused a certiorari, it appearing, on affidavit, 1. That the applicant had consented to waive the notice, and requested that the jury might be summoned for a day too near to admit of proper notice under the Act ; 2. That he had discussed the amount of compensation proper to be given, upon the supposition of the fence being erected, and, 3. That he did not now swear to his belief that the jury had awarded less money in consequence of the award as to the fence ; 4. That, in the dispute respecting the land, he had not mentioned his wife's interest, or the nature of the tenure, but had acted as if the property was his own freehold. [S. C. 1 P. & D. 79 ; 1 W. W. & H. 647 ; 8 L. J. Q. B. 64. Referred to, R. v. Surrey //., 1870, L. R. 5 Q. B. 473; R. v. Sheward, 1880-82, 5 Q. B. D. 182; 9 Q. B. D. 741.] W. H. Watson obtained a rule in Michaelmas term, 1837, calling upon the committee men under stat. 57 G. 3, c. Ixix. (local and personal, public), " for amending and rendering more effectual an Act of His present Majesty (a)2, for draining lands in South Holland," &c., to shew cause why a certiorari should not issue, to remove a verdict and inquisition, and judgment thereon, given on 16th August 1837, before and by the said committee men, touching the compensation to be made to Philip Coperaan for certain lands adjudged by the said committee men to be taken from him for the purpose of the Act. Sect. 2 of the local Act appoints trustees for the purposes of the Act. Sect. 11 directs the appointment of committee men for the purposes of the Act ; in whom, [430] by sect. 20, certain powers or authorities of the trustees are vested. Sect. 35 authorises the committee men to execute certain works. Sect. 36 enacts that they shall have power to agree, on behalf of the trustees, with the proprietors of, or persons (a)1 See the authorities in Todd v. Jeffery (7 A. & E. 519), and Bex v. Eve (5 A. & E. 780). (b) See Bex v. The Nottingham Old Waterworks Company (6 A. & E. 369, 370), Regina \. Trustees of Swansea Harbour, p. 448, post; judgment of Littledale J. (c) See the next two cases. (a)2 Stat. 33 G. 3, c. 109. Stat. 35 G. 3, c. 166, was also referred to in the Act. 902 THE QUEEN V. THE COMMITTEE MEN 8 AD. & E. 431. interested in, any lands, &c., which the committee men shall adjudge necessary to be taken or made use of for the purposes of the Act, for the purchase of such lands, &c., or for recompence to the proprietors, &c., for damage, &c.; and also to settle in what proportions the sum or sums so agreed for shall be paid to the several persons interested; and power is given to bodies politic, tenants for life or in tail, husbands, &c., to contract with the committee men ; but if any such body politic, &c., or other person...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taylor against Clemson and Vaughan
...I am satisfied with the distinction for which Mr. Cresswell contended." In Begina, v. The Committee Men for the South Holland Drainage (8 A. & E. 429), under a somewhat similar Act, it was objected that the inquisition did not state a notice to treat; there, however, the Court, adhering to ......
-
The Queen against The Inhabitants of Stainforth
...(6 M. & W. 320), Regina v. The Trustees of Swansea Harbour (8 A. & E. 439), Regina v. The Committeemen for the South Holland Drainage (8 A. & E. 429), Taylor v. Clemson (11 01. & Fin. 610, 636). Upon the whole, we come to the conclusion that the allowance, which was valid in fact, is not vo......
-
The Queen against The London and North Western Railway Company
...to Regina v. The Manchester and Leeds Railway Company, 8 A. & E. 413 ; and Regi-na v. The Committee Men for the South Holland Drainage, 8 A. & E. 429. (b) As to the incorporation of the preceding sections in sect. 68, reference was made to South Eastern Railway Company v. Richardson, in Exc......
-
R(Maguire) v The Justices of The County of Dublin
...16 Ir. C. L. R. 23. Ex- parte Hookey; in re Risca Coal and Iron Company 4 Dc G. F. & J. 456. Reg. v. South Holland Drainage Committee 8 A. & E. 429. Reg. v. BassENR 5 T. R. 251. R. v. Justices of WicklowUNK 16 Ir. C. L. R. 23. Justices — Order — Fine, or, in default, imprisonment — Warrant ......
-
PERSON AGGRIEVED IS SYNONYMOUS WITH PERSON HAVING INTEREST
...party interested - (see the Practice of the Crown Office by Short and Mellor at page 33; see also R. v. South Holland Drainage Consumers 8 A. and E. 429). A party interested has to be a "party aggrieved." Application is not to be granted merely because it is made by a member of the public. ......