Willis v Snook
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 April 1841 |
| Date | 27 April 1841 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 151 E.R. 986
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 10 L. J. Ex. 266; 5 Jur. 579.
willis 0. snook. Exch. of Pleas. April 27, 1S41.-The affidavit in support of an application for a capias, under the 1 & 2 Viet. c. 110, s. 3, need not state that the deponent has probable cause for believing that the defendant is about to quit England ; it is sufficient if the facts stated in the affidavit enable the Judge to form that belief. [S. C. 10 L. J. Ex. 26C ; 5 Jur. 579.] The defendant in this case having been arrested by virtue of a capias issued upon a judge's order, under the stat. 1 & 2 Viet. c. 110, s. 3, a rule had been obtained to shew cause why he should riot be discharged out of custody, on the ground that the affidavits upon which the order was made did not sufficiently establish the fact that he -was about to leave the kingdom. Platt having shewed cause against the rule on the merits, Erie, in support of it, objected, that the defendant was entitled to his discharge, on the ground that in the affidavits on which the order was made, none of the deponents stated that they had probable cause for believing that the defendant was about to leave the country in order to [148] avoid his creditors; and that a mere statement of circumstances, upon which such an inference was to be founded, was not sufficient. He likened it to the case of an application for a criminal information, where a mere statement of circumstances is not considered...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Underhill v Devereux
...for believing that the defendant is about to quit England ; it is sufficient if the facts stated enable the Judge to form that belief. 8 M. & W. 147, Willis v. Snook. See 7 Dowl. 725, Harvey v. O'Meara. Where an application is made to set aside the order for the capias on the ground of irre......
-
Jones v Gooday
...the commission of the trespass. lord abinger, C. B. I think there is no ground for a rule. I cannot at all assent 986 WILLIS V. SNOOK 8 M. & W. 147. to the principle which has been contended for, that a person whose land has been cut into, and the soil curried away, is therefore entitled, b......
-
Ruttle v Downes
...Hooke v. De Rovigo 3 Ir. Law Rep. 51. Farrell v. Maguire 3 Ir. Law Rep. 349. Hickey v. Moore 4 Ir. Law Rep. 468. Willis v. SnookENR 8 M. & W. 147. H. T. 1843. Queen'sBench. In re CAULFIELD, a Bankrupt. 364 CASES AT LAW. bankrupt with regard to these particulars inquired into, by reason of t......