The court was asked to decide whether shares in a joint stock company were to be classified as choses in action for the purposes of the proviso to section 44(iii) of the 1883 Act by which property in the order or disposition of the bankrupt in his trade or business with the consent of the true owner, other than choses in action, was made available for the satisfaction of his debts.
Held: The Court discussed the history and nature of choses in action.
Cotton and Lindley LJJ held that shares were not choses in action for the purposes of the statute, although they both regarded them as a form of intangible personal property.
Fry LJ (dissenting) held that the share were choses in action, satying that: ‘all personal things are either in possession or in action. The law knows no tertium quid between the two.’
Judges:
Cotton and Lindley L.JJ
Citations:
[1885] 30 ChD 261
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Colonial Bank v Whinney HL 1886
The parties disputed whether shares in a joint stock company were choses in action for the purposes of the 1883 Act so as to make them available to creditors on a bankruptcy.
Held: The appeal succeeded.
Blackburn L noted that there had . .
Cited – Your Response Ltd v Datateam Business Media Ltd CA 14-Mar-2014
The claimant employed the defendant to manage subscription lists for the claimant’s magazines. The claimant came to seek damages, and the defendant for non-payment of its invoices. The court was now asked whether it was possible to assert a common . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Company, Insolvency
Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.559267
