References: Times 22-Jul-1899
Coram: Darling J
A company claimed for money owed upon calls upon its shares. The defendant, Woodcock, admitted liability to the company but claimed against a Captain Rising that he held the shares as his nominee. The judge admitted in evidence terms of the negotiation between the plaintiffs and Captain Rising in which Captain Rising admitted ownership of the shares standing in the name of the nominee. The judge expressed doubts whether he should have admitted the evidence and said he did so because he had been pressed to do so by counsel. The protection afforded by ‘without prejudice’ does not extend to third parties.
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Rush & Tomkins Ltd -v- Greater London Council HL ([1989] AC 1280, [1988] 3 WLR 939, Bailii, [1988] 3 All ER 737, [1988] UKHL 7)
The parties had entered into contracts for the construction of dwellings. The contractors sought payment. The council alleged shortcomings in the works. The principal parties had settled the dispute, but a sub-contractor now sought disclosure of the . .
Last Update: 24-Sep-15 Ref: 253693
