The plaintiff had been arrested on a bill of Middlesex, a device allowing civil proceedings to be commenced in the Court of King’s Bench (rather than the Common Pleas) under the fiction that a trespass had been committed in the County of Middlesex. The bill was indorsed for bail for pounds 10, which the plaintiff’s attorney undertook whereupon the plaintiff was released. The defendant allowed the claim to lapse. The plaintiff had by then incurred costs of 13 guineas, but was only allowed pounds 4 4s 6d, leaving him out of pocket for pounds 9, which he claimed to recover.
Held: The claim failed, for want of evidence of malice, but Mansfield CJ said during submissions:
‘The plaintiff has recovered already in the shape of taxed costs all the costs which the law allows, and it cannot be that an action may be sustained for the surplus.’ and he added:
‘This is certainly a new species of action, I mean considering it as an action to recover the extra costs, for there was no proof of any inconvenience of any sort arising to the plaintiff, except in the payment of more costs than the law allows him, and which therefore he ought not to recover.’
Judges:
Mansfield CJ
Citations:
[1811] EngR 377, (1811) 4 Taunt 7, (1811) 128 ER 229
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Willers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 1) SC 20-Jul-2016
Parties had been involved in an action for wrongful trading. This was not persisted with but the claimant sought damages saying that the action was only part of a campaign to do him harm. This appeal raised the question whether the tort of malicious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.339461