Piaintiff being a foreigner, ignorant of the English language, was arrested at Falmouth soon after his first arrival there from abroad, by defendant, for 10,0001. Defendant and plaintiff then signed an agreement, by which, in consideration of 5001. paid by plaintiff to defendant, plaintiff was to be discharged, and not to be again arrested ; and, plaintiff was to put in bail in twelve days; the 5001. was to be ‘as a payment in part of the writ;’ arid both parties were to abide the event of the action ; the agreement contairiing no provision for refunding the money if the action ahould fail. Plaintiff paid the 500l and was released. No bail was put in ; and the writ was afterwards set aside for irregularity. Plaintiff then sued defendant for the 5001. as money had and received ; and the jury found that defendant knew that he had no claim upori plaintiff: Held, that the action lay, the payment having beeri made under the compulsioti of colourable legal process.
Citations:
[1836] EngR 632, (1836) 4 Ad and E 858, (1836) 111 ER 1006
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – John Ruskin College v Harley QBD 26-Nov-2013
A sum had been paid into court in 1997. Other sums were paid out, but this sum was left against costs liability. It was discovered much laterand paid out to the claimant. The former defendant now said that it had been paid out twice, and alleged . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Equity
Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.314964
