Company debentures were expressly excepted from the operation of the Bills of Sales Act (1878) Amendment Act 1882 by section 17 of that Act because they were debentures ‘issued by any mortgage, loan, or other incorporated company’. Nor were debentures bills of sale to which the Act of 1878 applied and company debentures themselves were … Continue reading In re Standard Manufacturing Co: CA 1891
The claimant agreed for the defendant to repair its fleet of vehicles. The defendant, having fees outstanding, entered the claimants’ premises and removed vehicles saying falsely that they were to be repaired, and then refused to return them. The claimants said that they were not bound by the defendants terms saying that they had not … Continue reading Online Catering Ltd v Acton and Another: CA 10 Feb 2010
The court considered the application of the 1878 Act. Held: Where there are a series of Acts dealing with a topic and with similar names, the words ‘this Act’ in expressions such as ‘in this Act’ or ‘under this Act’ must be construed to mean the combined Acts.Wills J said: ‘I am of the same … Continue reading Read v Joannon: 1890
Parsons was to advance money to Townsend. As security he was to have the right to take immediate possession of the goods and sell them. Held: As a licence to take possession of goods as between two private individuals, it fell within sections 3 and 4 of the 1878 Act. As whether it was a … Continue reading Ex parte Parsons, In re: Townsend: CA 1886
A business created under the Industrial and Provident Societies Acts is not a company in any standard legal sense. Vaughan Williams J distinguished Standard Manufacturing on the basis that the Court of Appeal was not excluding companies generally from these Acts of Parliament, but excluding only companies for whom provision had been made for the … Continue reading Great Northern Railway Co v Cole Co-Operative Society: 1896
The Bermudan company defendant had assigned stocks as a security. The security was not registered, and nor did the company have any registration within the UK. It was not the practice of the Registrar of Companies to accept particulars of charges for registration from an overseas company with a place of business in England. Held: … Continue reading N V Slavenburg’s Bank v Intercontinental Natural Resources Ltd: ChD 1980
A company registered in Guernsey issued debentures creating floating charges over real and personal property in England. The court was asked whether the debentures ought to be deemed to be within the Bills of Sales Acts and so ought to have been registered as bills of sale in circumstances where the company was not obliged … Continue reading Clark v Balm, Hill and Co: 1908
Mutual Knowledge admissible to construe contract The parties had entered into a development contract in respect of a site in Wandsworth, under which balancing compensation was to be paid. They disagreed as to its calculation. Persimmon sought rectification to reflect the negotiations. Held: The appeal succeeded. There were difficulties in construing the contract. The contract … Continue reading Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Others: HL 1 Jul 2009
The court was asked by the parties to a charterparty whether one of them is an ‘Affiliate’ of the charterer for the purposes of provisions in a charterparty by which both the owner and the charterer agreed to indemnify and hold each other harmless (including in the case of the charterer its ‘Affiliates’) in relation … Continue reading Farstad Supply As v Enviroco Ltd: SC 6 Apr 2011
The House was asked whether the appellant railway company had delivered the goods unconditionally to the goods owner so as to lose its lien for the price of coal carriage, or was there an agreement conferring ‘a right in equity to any personal . .
A true copy of a document was provided, but it was said that it could not be a true copy for an error as to the description of monthly payments.
Held: Bacon CJ said that a true copy did not necessarily need to be an exact copy: ‘but that it . .
The applicants, owners of a solvent family business, sought to register a charge over the company’s assets out of time.
Held: Buckley J saw the application under s 15 of the 1900 Act as a similar application to the application to register out . .