Vertue v Lord Clive
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 November 1769 |
| Date | 21 November 1769 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 98 E.R. 296
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
See 6 Durn. 628.
Referred to, R. v. Cuming, 1887, 19 Q. B. D. 16.
vertue ver. lord clive. Tuesday 21st Nov. 1769. Military officers in the East India service, liable to the military laws thereof. [See 6 Durn. 628.] [Referred to, E. v. Cuming, 1887, 19 Q. B. D. 16.] This was a case of the same kind with that of Captain Parker against Lord Olive, in Easter term last; reported ante, p. 2419. The difference between the two cases was only this. Captain Parker's turned upon the general abstract question, " whether a military officer in the service of the East India Company has a right to resign his commission at all times and under any circumstances, whenever he pleases:" the present case turned upon the particular circumstances under which Captain Vertue stood, at the time when he resigned his commission. It came before the Court, upon a motion for a new trial in an action for an assault and false imprisonment in India ò in which, the jury had found for the defendant. Mr. Dunning (Solicitor General) argued on behalf of the plaintiff Mr. Vertue, for a new trial. He denied that Mr. Vertue was in a military character, or in a capacity to commit a military offence, at the time when this military jurisdiction was exercised upon him by the defendant. The commission which Mr. Vertue had received contained no engagement or obligation upon the Company, to keep him in their service a moment longer than they liked ; nor upon him, to continue in their service longer than he liked : either party were at their liberty to put an end to the contract, under proper circumstances and in a proper situation. And these were proper circumstances, and a proper situation. The reduction of the [2473] batta, which had been allowed to the predecessors of these officers, took away from them what induced them to enter into the Company's service: and the enemy had been defeated, before the plaintiff resigned his commission. The question depends, therefore, upon the actual circumstances the plaintiff was under at the time of his resignation. Their common soldiers stipulate for five years certain. Their officers did not, at that time, stipulate for any limited time : and therefore, as the Company could at any time turn off their officers, they on the other hand ought to be at liberty to quit at any time, under proper circumstances. The Company were used to advance a month's pay. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Marks v Commonwealth
-
Re Opai Kunangel Amin [1991] PNGLR 1; Supreme Court Reference No 2 of 1982; Re Kunangel; In the Matter of a Reference under s18(2) of the Constitution by and Independent Tribunal appointed pursuant to s27(7)(e) of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership; and In the Matter of a reference by the Public Prosecutor pursuant to s27(2) of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership in respect of Opai Kunangel Amin
...v Lord Clive (1769) 4 Burr 2419; 98 ER 267, The State v Independent Tribunal; Ex parte Sasakila [1976] PNGLR 491, Vertue v Lord Clive (1769) 4 Burr 2472; 98 ER 296, Waleford Borough case (1870) 2 O'M & H 24 and Wallwork v Fielding [1922] 2 KB 66 referred to Constitutional Reference This was......
-
The State v Officer–in–Charge of the Wabag Corrective Institution and the Magistrates of the Kundis Village Court; Ex Parte Pende Kinakope [1982] PNGLR 308; SCR No 6 of 1981; State v OIC Wabag Corrective Institution [1982] PNGLR 308
...v Lord Clive (1769) 4 Burr 2419; 98 ER 267. State, The v Independent Tribunal; Ex parte Sasakila [1976] PNGLR 491. Vertue v Lord Clive (1769) 4 Burr 2472; 98 ER 296. Waleford Borough case (1870) 2 O'M & H 24. Wallwork v Fielding [1922] 2 KB 66. Constitutional Reference This was a reference ......
-
The King against Sir Joseph Mawbey, Bart. James Liptrott, Clerk, Ralph Leyoester, Esq. and the Reverend Edward Cooper
...held an illegal act; and consequently a resignation tendered under those circumstances was held not to be a determination of the service. 4 Burr. 2472. 2d. Where the subject-matter is not malum prohibitum as referred to the individual, though malum in se, but the criminality in law arises f......