Contract – Validity – Moneylender – Transaction of Business Elsewhere than his Registered Address – Moneylenders Act 1900 (63 and 64 Vict. cap. 51), sec. 2 – Moneylenders Act 1911 (1 and 2 Geo. V, cap. 38), sec. 1 (1).
The respondent was a registered moneylender in Liverpool. The appellant was introduced to him at an hotel in Formby as a friend of S. who wished to borrow pounds 200. The respondent produced a promissory-note for pounds 300, which the appellant signed in return for a cheque for pounds 200, which the appellant indorsed and handed to S. Held that the Moneylenders Act 1900, section 2 1 ( b), struck at the transaction as business carried on at other than the moneylender’s registered address and rendered it void. The appellant was therefore entitled to indemnification against his liability under an action brought against him by the bona fide holder for value of the bill.
Kirkwood v. Gadd,  A.C. 422, explained. Whiteman v. Sadler,  A.C. 514, distinguished.
Decision of the Court of Appeal ( dis. Phillimore, L.J.), sub. nom. Finegold v. Cornelius,  2 K.B. 719, reversed.
Lord Chancellor (Finlay), Viscount Haldane, Lords Dunedin, Atkinson, and Parmoor
 UKHL 545, 55 SLR 545
England and Wales
Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.631010