Rawson v Samuel: 15 Apr 1841

Cottenham LC said: ‘We speak familiarly of equitable set-off as distinguished from set-off at law, but it will be found that this equitable set-off exists in cases where the party seeking the benefit of it can show some equitable ground for being protected against his adversary’s demands. The mere existence of cross demands is not sufficient.’ and ‘Several cases were cited in support of the injunction but in every one of them except Williams v Davies (1829) 2 Sim 461 it will be found that the equity of the bill impeached the title to the legal demand.’
Cottenham LC
(1841) 1 Cr and Ph 161, [1841] EngR 491, (1839, 1840, 1841) Cr and Ph 161, (1841) 41 ER 451
Commonlii
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoRawson v Samuel 29-Nov-1838
A bill was filed for an account of dealings and transactions between the parties and to restrain an action brought by the Defendant against the Plaintiff for a breach of contract in n ot accepting bills drawn on him by the Defendant.
Held: The . .
See AlsoRawson v Samuel 22-Feb-1839
. .

Cited by:
CitedBritish Anzani (Felixstowe) Ltd v International Marine Management (UK) Ltd ChD 19-Dec-1978
Money expended by a tenant on discharging his landlord’s covenants will in appropriate circumstances operate as a partial or a complete discharge so as to furnish a defence at law to a claim for unpaid rent; and where the tenant has suffered damage . .
CitedAries Tanker Corp v Total Transport Ltd; The Aries HL 1977
Claims for freight charges are an exception to the general rule that all claims between parties must be resolved in one action. A claim for freight cannot be a claim ‘on the same grounds’ as a counter-claim for loss or damage arising out of the . .
CitedDole Dried Fruit and Nut Co v Trustin Kerwood Ltd CA 1990
The defendant had an exclusive distributorship agency for the plaintiff in England. Under that agreement, the plaintiff sold its prunes and raisins to the defendant under separate contracts of sale. The plaintiff claimed the price of goods sold . .
CitedGeldof Metaalconstructie Nv v Simon Carves Ltd CA 11-Jun-2010
The parties contracted for the supply and installation of pressure vessels by Geldof (G) for a building constructed by Simon Carves (SC). The contract contained a clause denying the remedy of set-off. G sued for the sale price, and SC now sought an . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 January 2021; Ref: scu.247741