Wait and Another v Baker
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 07 February 1848 |
| Date | 07 February 1848 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 154 E.R. 380
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S C 17 L J Ex 307 Approved, Jenkyns v Brown, 1849, 14 Q B 496, Turner v Liverpool Docks Trustees, 1851, 6 Ex 543 Discussed, Mirabita v Imperial Ottoman Bank, 1878, 3 Ex D 169 Referred to, Van Casteel v Booker, 1848, 2 Ex. 691, Joyce v Swann, 1864, 17 C B (N S), 84, Ex parte Pearson, In re Wiltshire Iron Company, 1868, L R 3 Ch Ap 448, Hertbutt v Hrckson, 1872, L R 7 C P. 450, Gabarron v Kreeft, 1875, L R 10 Ex 280
The EXCHEQUER REPORTS. REPORTS of CASES ARGUED and DETERMINED in the COURTS of EXCHEQUER and EXCHEQUER CHAMBER, Hilary Vacation, 11 VICT., to Trinity Vacation, 12 VICT., both inclusive. By W. N. WELSBY, of the Middle Temple; E. T. HURLSTONE, of the Inner Temple, and J. GORDON, of the Middle Temple, Esquires, Barristers-at-Law. Vol II. London, 1849. tf. ictf, fit, it/t-i, i [1] exchequer eeporik hilary vacation, 11 vtct \VAlTANDAlSOTHERi; BAKER Feb 5 & 7, 1848-The defendant, d corn-factoi, residing at Bristol, in Decembei, 1846, wiote to one L , at Plymouth, requesting samples of barley, arid to make him an otfei of a caigo In the same month L wrote to defendant, and sent samples of bailey, and offered to sell defendant from 400 to 500 quarters fob, at Kirigsbiidge, or some neighbouring poit, fot a certain sum, for cash, on handing bill of lading, or by acceptance, &c The defendant accepted the terms, subject to L 's reply L acceded to defendant's proposal, and requested defendant to give him instructions about the vessel, in order to get her correctly insured L sent the defendant the charter-party (not under seal) of a vessel in which the bailey was to be shipped, and which was made in L 's name In Januaiy, 1847, the vessel was loaded with the barley, and L received from the master the bill of lading, by which the caigo wab deliverable at Bristol to the order of L , or assigns, on payment of freight Subsequently, L called at the defendant's counting-house in Bristol, and left the invoice and unindorsed bill of lading, he afterwards called again, when a dispute arose as to the quality of the bailey, the defendant, after some further dispute, tendered the amount of the cargo in money to L , who refused to accept it, but took away the bill of lading, and indorsed it to the plaintiffs The defendant, on the arrival of the vessel, claimed and obtained pait of the cargo, but the plaintiffs, on producing the bill of lading, obtained what lemained, and paid the freight The jury found that the defendant did not lefuse to accept the barley from L , that the tender was unconditional, and that he was not an agent entrusted with the bill of lading by defendant -Held, in an action of trover by the plaintiffs for the value of the barley so obtained by the defendant, that no property in the cargo passed to the defendant, either by the transaction at Bristol or by the shipment of the cargo on board the vessel by L , and that, therefore, the plaintiffs were entitled to recover [S C 17 L J Ex 307 Approved, Jenkym, v Brovm, 1849, 14 Q B 496, Turnet v Liverpool Docks Trustee?, 1851, 6 Ex 543 Discussed, Mnabita v Imperial Ottoman Bank, 1878, 3 Ex D 169 Referred to, Van Vakeel v Bookei, 1848, 2 Ex. 691 , Joyce v Swann, 1864, 17 C B (N S ), 84 , Ev pa/te Pea/ton, In ie Wiltshire Inn Company, 1868, L E 3 Ch Ap 448, Heilbutt \ Hickson, 1872, L E 7 C P. 450, (tabairmv Kieeft, 1875, L E 10 Ex 380] Trover for 500 quarters of barley Pleas not guilty, and not possessed, upon which issue was joined 2 EX. 2. WAIT V. BAKER 381 At the trial, before Williams, J., at the last Spring Assizes for Somersetshire, the following facts appeared :-The defendant, a corn-factor at Bristol, had occasional dealings with a person of the name of Lethbridge, who was also a corn-factor at Plymouth, and on the 5th of December, 184( , wrote to him the following letter :-ò " I hear that the crop of barley in the south of Hamp-[2]-shire is good this year, and that at Kingsbridge the price is low, compared with the markets further east-ward. If you are doing anything in the article this season, and can make me an offer of a cargo, I have no doubt but we may have a transaction. Let me hear from you in clue course. Send me sample in letter, describing weight," &c. To which Lethbridge wrote the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
SD (British Citizen Children – Entry Clearance) Sri Lanka
...55 European Convenlton on Human Rights, Article 8 Immigration Rules HC 395 (as amended), sections E-ECP. 1-3.4, E-ECPT.2.2(c), E-LTRPT.2.2, EX.1, GEN. 1.3(c), GEN 3.1-3.3 & R-LTRPT 1.1 of Appendix FM and section 21A(2) & (8) of Appendix FM-SE Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, se......
- James v Commonwealth
-
Mitsui & Company Ltd v Flota Mercante Grancolombiana S.A. (Ciudad de Neiva, Ciudad de Pasto)
...so as to pass the property. If this were not the case, considerable difficulties would arise in financing f.o.b. sales." 30 See also Wait & anr. v. Baker (1848) 2 Exch. 1. That was one of the cases on which section 19(2) appears to have been based. The expression "f.o.b." determines how the......
- Smyth (Ross T.) & Company Ltd v T. D. Bailey, Son & Company
-
Tax-Free Spin-Off? That May Depend . . . On Post-Spin-Off Events
...requirement is an independent requirement for IRC Sec. 355 qualification. [xlviii] Reg. Sec. 1.355-2(c)(1). [xlix] Reg. Sec. 1.355-2(c)(2), Ex. 1. [l] Rev. Proc. 96-30. [li] This should be distinguished from the acquisitive reorganization provisions, for which the continuity of interest tes......
-
Tax-Free Spin-Off? That May Depend . . . On Post-Spin-Off Events
...requirement is an independent requirement for IRC Sec. 355 qualification. [xlviii] Reg. Sec. 1.355-2(c)(1). [xlix] Reg. Sec. 1.355-2(c)(2), Ex. 1. [l] Rev. Proc. [li] This should be distinguished from the acquisitive reorganization provisions, for which the continuity of interest test is ap......
-
Why are there tax havens?
...note 19, at 70 ("[T]ax havens are in competition with each other and with high-tax countries."). (202.) See 26 C.F.R. [section] 1.901-2(c)(2), ex. 1 (2009) (denying a foreign tax credit for special taxes imposed by a foreign country on residents of only four other (203.) See Keen, supra not......
-
Relevance: overbroad and burdensome questions
...id. ¶ 53). Arcuri noticed the deposition of Craig Appleton, Tyrannosaurus’s vice president for operations, on July 28, 2020 (Cooley decl. ¶ 2, Ex. 1). The day before the deposition, Arcuri served a deposition subpoena requiring Mr. Appleton to produce detailed financial records of Tyrannosa......