Willis v Yates
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1834 |
| Date | 01 January 1834 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 47 E.R. 177
LORD BROUGHAM
[498] willis v. yates. [1834.] Petitions of appeal ought not to suppress material facts, especially steps of procedure. A party having acquiesced in the cause being heard below, on the question of costs only, cannot afterwards be permitted to appeal from the decree. Bill being dismissed, an injunction falls with it, without special order. Feb. 27, 1834. lord chancellor. A bill was filed, the prayer of which was for an injunction to restrain the Defendants from proceeding to sink a certain pit, or making a communication between that and another pit, and from driving a back tunnel, and generally from doing anything whereby the water from the Defendants' mines might be drained into the Plaintiffs' levels. I have here to observe that the copy of the petition of appeal, with which I am furnished, is even more than usually, and that is saying a good deal, slovenly in the copying; for I must of course believe that the fault lies in the copying. The prayer is unintelligible. It is that the Defendants should be restrained from making a communication between the pit marked E, and from driving a back tunnel, without saying to what other pit the communication should be forbidden to be made; that is, leaving out the only thing which is very material in the prayer. On looking at the bill itself, we find that the words " and the pit marked C" are omitted. So the date of filing the answer is left in blank. Moreover not a word is said that I can find in the petition of any injunction having been granted, though much turns upon this, and it is admitted to have been granted 10th November 1826, on filing the bill. It would be much better to have no such [499] thing as petitions, or at least not to go through the mockery of delivering a copy of them, if they are to be transcribed after so slovenly a fashion. If this practice be persisted in much longer, I shall be under the necessity of taxing the party with costs in some shape, either for presenting a petition suppressing any material facts, especially steps of procedure, or for giving in an imperfect copy of the petition. The Courts of law will not suffer a case to be argued, if the paper books do not contain a statement of the points; no such facility is given to the Courts of Equity. They are to find then all the points from the facts; but it is in vain to suppose that any Court can discover what points are to be raised before it, if the very facts...
To continue reading
Request your trial