Watson v Knight
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 13 June 1854 |
| Date | 13 June 1854 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 52 E.R. 393
ROLLS COURT.
Followed, In re Meredith, 1885, 29 Ch. D. 749.
[369] watson v. knight. June 10, 13, 1854. [Followed, In re Meredith, 1885, 29 Ch. D. 749.] Though a creditor who is prevented by accident signing a composition deed within the period specially appointed for that purpose may obtain equitable relief, yet it will not be extended to one who has delayed making his claim, and has set up a title adverse to the deed. In 1850 the Plaintiff, Sarah Watson, obtained a judgment against her son John Watson. On the 16th of April 1851 John Watson conveyed and assigned all his real and personal estate to trustees for the benefit of his creditors, who should execute the same on or before the 2d day of June then next. The deed proceeded in these terms : "Every such creditor or creditors to be excluded from all benefit hereunder, who shall not execute these presents on or before [370] the said 2d day of June next, notwithstanding any rule at law or in equity to the contrary." On the 16th of April 1851 Mr. Moore, the solicitor of John Watson, sent a circular to the Plaintiff and the other creditors informing them of the deed, and that it was lying at his office for their execution, but no mention was therein made of the 2d of June being the last day for signing. Advertisements were inserted in the local papers on the 30th and 31st of May, stating the assignment for the benefit of such creditors as should execute the deed on or before the 2d day of June, and notice was also given that the deed was then lying at the office of Mr. Moore at Carlisle, for the execution and signature of creditors. The Plaintiff resided at a distance of about six miles from Carlisle, and in the forenoon of the 2d of June her son called at Mr. Moore's office, and offered to execute the deed on her behalf, but Mr. Moore refused to permit him to do so, unless under power of attorney; though he offered to keep the deed at his private house for the Plaintiffs convenience, and to allow her to sign it herself at any time before twelve o'clock at night. The Plaintiff did not, however, avail herself of the permission. E. v.-13* 394 TREVOR V. BLUCKE 19 BEAV. 371. On the 20th of October 1851 the lands comprised in the deed were put up for sale by public auction, when the Plaintiffs solicitor gave notice that she had a claim on the estate for the amount of the judgment, and that the purchasers would take subject thereto. The estate was sold...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Whitmore v Turquand
...alleged : Dunch v. Kent (1 Vern. 260), field v. Lord Dmoughmore (1 Dr. & War. 227), Nicholson v. Tutin (2 Kay & J. 18),. Watson v. Knight (19 Beav. 369), Spottiswoode v. Stockdale (G. Coop. 102), Broadbent v. Thornton (4 De G. & S. 65). Mr. Rolt, Q.C., and Mr. C. Hall, for the trustees. Mr.......
-
Field v Cook
...to entitle himself to the benefit of its provisions. Mr. R. Palmer, in reply. Field v. Tit-muss (I Sim. (N. S.) 218); Watson v. Knight (19 Beav. 369); Bush v. [603] Shipman (14 Sim. 239); Johnson v. Kerxhaw (1 De G. & S. 260), and Gould v. tiobertson (4 De G. & S. 509), were cited. the mast......
-
Biron, on behalf, & v Mount
...and must be ascertained and paid to him, as part of the assets, for distribution amongst the creditors. He cited Watson v. Knight (19 Beav. 369); Broadbent v. Thornton (4 De Gex & S. 65). Mr. Faber, for the trustees. Mr. Biron, for Watts. Mr. R. Palmer and Mr. A. E. Miller, for the creditor......
-
Re Peter Phelan, a Bankrupt. v
...Gardner v. ChapmanENR 8 C. B., N. S., 317. Raworth v. ParkerENR 2 Kay & J. 163. Biron v. MountENR 24 Beav. 642. Watson v. KnightENRUNK 19 Beav. 369; S. C., 1 W. & T., L. C., 212. Biron v. MountENR 24 Beav. 642. CHANCERY REPORTS. 467 1862. Banktcy., 4c. In re PETER PHELAN, a Bankrupt. I'm ca......