Wickens v Evans

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date22 July 1830
Date22 July 1830
CourtExchequer

English Reports Citation: 148 E.R. 1201

EXCH. OF PLEAS.

Wickens
and
Evans

Referred to, Young v. Timmins, 1831, 1 C. & J. 336; Mogul Steamship Company v. M'Gregor, 1889, 23 Q. B. D. 628; Urmston v. Whitelegg, 1890, 63 L. T. 455.

WlCKENH v. EVANN. Exch. of Pleas. 1829.-An agreement between three persons carrying on the trade of trunk and box makers, and travelling, by themselves and their servants, into various parts of England, to vend trunks and boxes, to divide, and not interfere with certain districts of the several cities, boroughs, towus, and villages, as set forth by them on Bowles's Post-map of England ; and that each, during his life, by himself, and his agents duly authorized, shall travel into, to sell trunks and boxes in his way of business, without any interruption whatsoever, by either of the other two, during their joint lives, in certain cities, boroughs, towns, and villages, and not to suffer any goods in the said trade to be manufactured at their respective shops or warehouses, or to be sent from their respective shops, houses, or warehouses, or from any other place, for the purpose of being sold or disposed of on the ground to be travelled by the other parties thereto ; and not to aid or assist any person to oppose all, or any, and either of the parties ; aivd not to purchase any tea chest or chests, black or green, at a higher price than fid. or 8d. each in Oxford ; and in case, at any time, during their joint lives, any person or persons shall set up and oppose any or either of the parties, to meet together, and enter into such mutual agreement, to the intent therein agreed to, as shall be beneficial to the mutual interests of the parties, it being declared to be their intentions not to do any act prejudicial to thu interests of each other, but to aid and assist each other in their said trade and business, to the utmost of their power, does not operate in general restraint of trade, and, as an agreement contemplating a partial restraint only, is founded on a sufficient and valid consideration. Therefore, counts setting forth the same, and averring, by way of breaches, that the defendant travelled into the districts of the plaintiff, and sold boxes therein :-Held good, on general demurrer. [Referred to, Young v. Timmins, 1831, 1 C. & J. 33G; Mogul Steamship Company v. M'Gngm; 1889, 23 Q. B. 1). 628; Urmstan v. IVhitdegg, 1890, 63 L. T. 455.] Assumpsit. The first count of the declaration stated that, before and at the time of making the articles of agreement, and the promise and undertaking of the said 1202 WICKENS V. EVANS 3Y.&J.319. defend-[319]-ant thereinafter next mentioned, the said plaintiff was a box-maker, and the trade, business, and calling of a box-maker had used, exercised, and canned on, and still did use, exercise, and carry on, to wit, at Oxford, in the county of Oxford ; and whereas, before and until the making of the said articles of agreement, the said plaintiff, from time to time, travelled, by himself and his servants, into various parts of the country, and of the several districts in the said articles of agreement mentioned and referred to, for there vending trunks and boxes, by him made in his said trade, business, and calling; and the said defendant and one William Fletcher also severally and respectively exercised and carried on the said trade, business, and calling of box-makers, and, severally and respectively, travelled into various parts'of the country and of the several districts aforesaid, for there severally and respectively vending and selling trunks and boxes, to wit, at Oxford aforesaid, in the county aforesaid ; and thereupon, theretofore, to wit, on &c., at &c., by certain articles of agreement, hearing date a certain day and year, to wit, &c., then and there made and entered into, between the said William Fletcher, of the first part ; the said defendant, of the second part; and the said plaintiff, of the third part; reciting, that, whereas the said William Fletcher-, Daniel Evans, and Joseph Wickens had, for several years last past, travelled into various parts of the country, vending trunks and boxes for sale, but, on account of the inconvenience and loss which they severally acknowledged to sustain, by reason of their exercising their trade and calling in places which they wished to keep separate and distinct from each other, they, the said William Fletcher, Daniel Evans, and Joseph Wickens, had, in consideration thereof, agreed to divide the same, and enter into the terms and conditions thereinafter mentioned relative to such division, (that is to say), the said William Fletcher, Daniel Kvans, and Joseph Wickens did thereby, [320] severally and respectively, agree with each other to divide, and not interfere with certain districts of the several cities, boroughs, towns, und villages, set forth on Bowles's Postmap of England and Wales, thereto annexed and referred to, and signer! with the respective proper hand-writing of the said William Fletcher, Daniel Evans, and Joseph Wickens, it being the true intent and meaning of the said parties thereto, and of those presents, that the said William Fletcher should and might, at all times thereafter, during the life of the said William Fletcher, by himself and his agents (duly authorized only), travel into, to sell trunks and boxes in his way of business, without any interruption whatsoever by the said Daniel Evans and Joseph Wickens, or either of them, during their joint natural lives, in the several cities, boroughs, towns, and villages, marked with ink, and set out with black cotton, so set forth and described on the aaid map, as aforesaid; and also, that the said Daniel Evans should and might, at all times thereafter, during the life of him the said1 Daniel Evans, by himself and his agents (duly authorized only), travel into, to sell trunks and boxes in his way of business, without any interruption whatsoever by the said William Fletcher and Joseph Wickens, or either of them, during their joint natural lives, in the several cities, boroughs, towns, and villages, marked with ink, and set out with black cotton, so set forth and described on the said map, as aforesaid ; and also, that the said Joseph Wickens should and might, at all times thereafter, during the life of him the said Joseph Wickens, by himself and his agents (duly authorized only), travel into, to sell trunks and boxes in his way of business, without any interruption whatsoever by the said William Fletcher and Daniel Evans, or either of them, during their joint natural lives, in the several cities, boroughs, towns, and villages, marked with ink, and set out with black cotton, so set forth and described on the said [321] map, as aforesaid. And it was thereby further agreed by and between the said parties thereto, that they, and each of them, should also be at liberty to travel, for such purposes of trade as aforesaid, during their joint natural lives, as aforesaid, to all such other places as might thereafter be built, although not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • R v Associated Northern Collieries
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • Invalid date
  • John Tallis against Frederick Tallis
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the Queen's Bench
    • January 1, 1853
    ...the by-law imposing the restraint was held to be good upon the supposition that the reason given for it was true. Wiekens v. Evaiis (3 Y. & J. 318), is a very strong case: there a contract was upheld which directly stipulated for a combination to check the competition of strangers. In Chesm......
  • Hunlocke v Blacklowe
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • January 1, 1845
    ...in any part of Great Britain for twenty years, was valid.) Further authorities, confirming the doctrines above stated, will be found in 3 Y. & J. 318, Wickens v. Evans. 3 Bing. 322, Homer v. Ashford. 11 Moo. 91, S. C. 2 M. & W. 273, Wallis v. Day. 3 M. & W. 545, Leighton v. Wales. The quest......
  • Andrew v Andrew
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • May 2, 1856
    ...never stamped, and is lost. Secondary evidence of its contents could not, under such circumstances, have been given ; Wickens v. Evans (4 Car. & P. 359); Smith v. Henley (1 Phil. 391); Rippiner v. Wright (2 B. & A. 478); Rex v. Inhabitants of Castle Morton (3 B. & A. 588); 424 ANDREW V. AND......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT