swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Banking - From: 1200 To: 1799
This page lists 9 cases, and was prepared on 03 April 2018.
Thomas Brand, of London, Goldsmith(A), Ex Parte v Sir Alexander Cumming, of Coulter, Bart [1725] UKHL Robertson_511; (1725) Robertson 511
27 Jan 1725
HL
Banking
Promissory Note - It is objected to a promissory note, that it was not holograph, nor signed before witnesses, and that therefore the signing and payment of the money ought to be proved: but it having been granted in London, the objections are repelled.
A partial payment was to be deducted, first out of the interest, and afterwards out of the capital. (These before the appeal.)
Usury - Process - A defender having alleged usury against a promissory note granted to the pursuer, the pursuer a goldsmith or banker in London, is ordered to confess or deny the facts, and a commission is granted to Lord Chief Justice King, to take extracts from his books he residing in London.
Foreign - A person residing in London, brings action on a promissory note in Scotland, against which usury is pleaded; the clerk is ordered to retain the note in Court, till the pursuer should transfer to his agent in Scotland, a collateral security in stock which had been granted by the defender.
[ Bailii ]
The Governor and Co of The Royal Bank of Scotland, and Andrew Cochrane, Merchant In Glasgow v The Governor and Co of The Bank of Scotland [1729] UKHL 1_Paton_14; (1729) 1 Paton 14
9 Feb 1729
HL
Banking
Bank - legal diligence - In a case betwixt the two banks, it was found by the Court of Session that neither horning, inhibition, nor arrestment, were competent against the bank of Scotland, upon their notes or tickets, the diligence being done in emulationem.
[ Bailii ]
The Bank of England v Morice, Executrix of Humphrey Morice Deceased [1734] EngR 64; (1734) Kel W 165; (1734) 25 ER 549
1734
Banking
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Commonlii ]
The Bank of England v Katherine Morice, Widow, And Others [1737] EngR 137; (1737) 2 Bro PC 465; (1737) 1 ER 1068
24 May 1737
PC
Banking
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Commonlii ]
George Ochterlony v Archibald Hunter, Et Alii [1745] UKHL 1_Paton_396
9 Apr 1745
HL
Banking
Bill of Exchange -
Found that one who had retired bills in London, supra protest, for the honour of the drawer, (who was in Scotland,) was not debarred of his recourse against the drawer, although he did not give notice of the dishonour of the bills for eight days.
Found also that this was a sufficient notification of the dishonour of other bills, retired in the same way, although payable after the date of the letter
[ Bailii ]
James Grosett, Son and Executor-Dative of Walter Grossett of Logie, Esq, Deceased, Formerly Inspector-General of His Majesty's Customs In Scotland v Sir James Murray, Receiver-General of The Customs In Scotland (1763) 2 Paton 81; [1763] UKHL 2_Paton_81
17 Mar 1763
HL
Banking
Bill - Negotiation.-
Held a party (a public officer) to whom a bill was indorsed in security of the customs, was bound, on the bill falling due, duly to negotiate it, and payment not being recovered in consequence of his neglect to do so: Held him liable in the contents.
[ Bailii ]
Alexander Brebner, Merchant In Portsoy v John Haliburton and Company, Merchants In Edinburgh [1763] UKHL 6_Paton_753; (1763) 6 Paton 753
13 Dec 1763
HL
Banking
The appellant sent three bills to the respondents (with whom he had dealings in business) for the purpose of negotiation and payment, indorsing them for that purpose. The respondents delayed timeously to present the bills for payment, and failed otherwise in duly negotiating the same, but they sent them to Boyd in Glasgow, with whom they had dealings, who failed with the proceeds in their hands. Held (1), That there was no culpable negligence on the part of the respondents to subject them in liability, and (2) As regarded the sum of £200 sent by Boyd to Haliburton, on 25th March, sought to be imputed pro rata of this debt, this remitted to the
[ Bailii ]
Wilkins v Aikin [1789] EngR 2270; (1789-1817) 2 Ves Jun Supp 488; (1789) 34 ER 1192 (D)
1789
Insolvency, Banking
[ Commonlii ]
Kellock v Robinson [1795] EngR 2268; (1795) 2 Str 745; (1795) 93 ER 822 (B)
1795
Banking
Where part of a note is received of the drawer, the indorsor is not to be resorted to for the rest.
In an action by the indorsee of a promissory note against the indorsor, it appeared the plaintiff had after the indorsement received part of the drawer of the note : and it was held to be a taking upon himself to give the whole credit to the drawer of the note, and absolutely discharged the indorsor. So the plaintiff was nonsuit.
[ Commonlii ]
