68
SUPREME COURT,
♦
Friday, January 25th.
IN ORIGINAL. JURISDICTION.
BIFORE SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEL
JUSTICE).
FIRE INSURANCE CLAIM.
THE HONGKON; WEEKLY PRESS AND
The Hon. Mr. H. F. Pollock, K.C., appeared | for the plaintiff in the action-Lai Sui Win e Union Fire Insurance Company, Limited-and said he had to make a motion which was made x-parle of the judgment and was supported by an affidavit which would show his Lordship the for moving reparte. The actual that judgment might be entered in that action for plaintiff for $1.854.3 and costs. The affidavit by Mr. R. A. Harding. was read in which it was stated that plaintif
reason motion
was
claimed from the defendants the amount slated in respect of the loss sustained by him through fire and which was proportionately covered by a fire insurance policy in that Company.
It will be remembered that defendants agreed to be bound by the decision in the action heard before his Lordship and a special jury, in which the same plaintiff proceeded against the North German Fire Insurance Company to recover a : certain sum under a fire insurance policy. In that action judgment was given in favour of plaintiff.
Defendants reply to Mr. Harding's letter was that they did not intend to instruct couusel.
Judgment for plaintiff with costs WAS accordingly outered.
Monday, January 28th.
IN APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
BEFORE THE FOLL. COUBT.
CONFISCATED MURIATE OF MORTHEN
Sir Houry Berkeley. K.C.. instructed by Me J. Scott Harton (of Messrs. Eweus and Haretini moved, pursuant to notice, for an urder niri calling upon the magistrate, Mr. Hazolaud. to show cinse why their Lordships should not issue a writ of certiorari to quash a certain order ma e by the Magistrate who, assuming to act under section 39, Ordinance of 1891, forfeited. four cases of muriate of morphia. the property of Mr. William Hofmann of Shanghai. which had been seized on July 23rd. 1906. at Tsimchatsoi. Kowloon, in godown 21 of the Hongkong and Kowloon Wharf and Godown L'o.
The Chief Justice -Of course we bave read the file, but is this going to be opposed?
eir Henry Berkeley-Since the notice was filed we received a letter.
The Paisne Judge Have you got your stuff? Sir Henry Berkeley-We have not got it yet.. Before doing so we wish to put ourselves in order by getting the order wisi.
The Chief Justice-I
suppose you want to get the Magistrate's order quashed?
Sir Henry Berkeley Yes, and it is a question after that of compensation and costs. We have been driven to take this stop, but if they give us costs that will be the end of the matter. Counsel then put in the affidavits filed in the case. The Chief Justice The only question that occurred to me when reading the papers is as to whether it was not construction as distinguished from jurisdiction.
นค
Sir Henry Berkeley-Ne. In this case should have originally appealed, but the mau knew nothing about his property having been forfeited until some time afterwards. To give, jurisdic ion this property should have been opium whereas it is piuriate of morphin.
The Chief Justics That I think is construc. tion.
i
•
I
|
i
February 4, 1907..
from | subscribed through him. The mopey was
After
addresses hearing lengthy counsel ou both sides, his Lordship reserved his decision.
Tuesday, January th
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICETON,
Before Sir Francis Pignori (Cais?
JUSTICEJ
WAL WONG HONG BANK P. SUA WENG CHEONG.
FIRM.
The plaintiffs in this action claimed from the defendants the sum of $20 at due for money lent.
Mr. M. W. Slade, instructed by Mr. D. V.
Stevenson of Messrs. crn. Looker and Deacon) appeared for plaintiffs, and Hon. Mr. E. l'ollock, K.C., instructed by Mr. C. Dixon (of Mr. John Hastings' office; represent ed the defendants.
The statement of claim set forth that ou
various dates between June 3rd. 1996, and February 7th, 1901, the plaintiff's lent to the defendants. sums amonuting to $20,000 repay- able on demand, and on various dates batween November 27th and December 23rd, 1904. it was agreed between the parties that the said loans should bear interest at the rate of $14 pe cest por Chinese mouth from the respective dates of such agro-ments until repayment Written memoranda or promissory notes in respect of the said loans and written memoranda of the said agreements were made by the parties. The plaintiff's frequently demanded payment of the loans and interest, but the defendants declined 10
JAY the
or any purl. thereof. On the 9th and 2nd January. 1909. the plaintiffs borrowed from the defendants $7,000 bearing interest from the sand respective dates until repayment, and the defendants ware entitled to set off the amount thus dus co them
The claim was for the principal sum of 8200m with interest till repayment as aforesaid, less the principal amount of $7,ren with interest till repayment and such other relief as tho C
Courty thought it
+
subscribed in a lump sum through the Sai Wing Cheong firm, of which firm Chau Tuu-pʊ was the principal partner. Evidence was called and the case adjourned.
Thursday, January 31st.
IN BANKRUPTCY.
Before Sie Praxers Piggott (('#iRK JUSTICE).
CHUNG SHUNKOO'S AFFAIRS. Auother decision was delivered in this haukruptcy., his Lordship holding that the costs of the motion to rescind the order given bo Ho Tung to amend his proof must be borns by him. The motion of the trustee calling upon
certain creditors to substantiate their claims
must be borne out of the estate, also the motion of the trustee calling a mecting, and his motion to restrain the sale of the furniture must be costs of the bankrupte. His Lordship did not feel justified in calling apon Mr. Ho Tung to pay all these costs.
A KOWE ON FAILURE.
AR Matthacy es parte the debtor. Mr. E. J. firist (of Messrs. Wilkinsou aud Prish who appoared for the debtor presented a dbtor's petition and informed his lordship that Mr. Matthagy had been unable to file no affidavit of assets by regson of his bing ie hospital, but there was a distraint at the pressut fime on his premises. They were very large premises, containing a great deal of furniture and the assets were estimated at $2,000, the liabilities being 828,000,
His Lordship-You want me to ako au order without the full statement.
Mr. Grist Of course, my I ri, the dablur will have to file his statement of affairs. know there must be a considerable amount of
Property there, but there is a distraint for eight. mouths reut, and an action puding for four months rent.
His Lordship -Have you nothing to say Mr. Wakeman?
The Official Resiver I don't know that there will be anything oft after the laudlord
has had his share.
His Lordship. What is the rout? Mr. Grist 1,200 a month.
H ́s Landship And what is wrong with the debtor
Mr. Grist Heart failur
His Lordship –Caut he make his d-clavilion ? Mr. Grist No. Diy Lord This trouble has gut on the man's mind very much.
In the statement of defeuce the defelauts admitted the plaintiffs loau of various sums amounting to 820,000 repayable ou demand. They also admitted that it was agreed the said loans should bear interest as mentioned and that plaintifs had demanded payment. but denied that demands had been made frequrally and further said that as a matter of fact they had deposited with the plaintiffs a further sum of $20,000 on or about May 20th, 1993, sich sum to boar interest at the rate of 81 per $100 per Chinese month. This sum owing, with interest, up to the date of the writ of summons amounted to $28, 193,33. The plaintiffs accordingly owed to the defendants upon the balance of ace mout between them up to the date of the wed of Breore M1. A G. Wish (Prisar Jumu. summons the difference between the sums of $25.53 and $11,16410, or $11,282.13. for which amount with interest from the date of the writ until payment or judgment they counter- claim-d.
In reply the plaintiff's stated that with regard to the $20,000 mentioned in the statement of defence as having broɑ deposited with the bank, i on May 20th, 19k, that sum was paid by the defendants on behalf of and at the request of Chau Tun-po, one 1
the of the partners iu defendant firm, as his share in the capital of
the plaintiff bank. Prior to the date iu question Chan Tun-po agreed to become a partner in the bank which
was about to he established, and to contribute the said sum in that respect. The plaintiff bank began business on or about May 20th, 1903, and Chan was the “. and still is, a partuer therein. The plaintiff ` joined issue, and with regard to the counter
claim, denied liability to the defeudarts. Sir Boury Barkeley-Possibly.
Mr. Slade stated that the portentous list The order was granted and the appeal will be; of pleadings came down
au inquiry heard on Monday.
to whether
but the $20,000 paid by the Sui Wing Cheug dru deposit at interest with the Wai Wing Hong bank, or was a payment of the share in the capital of that bank which was agreed to be 1 taken by Chan Tun-po. The Wai Wing Houg
bauk started business ou May 25th, 1990) ¦ About that date various people had agreed to become partners, among them being Châu. His share was partly paid for by his own money, and partly through the money of others who
IN URIGINAL JURISDICTION
BEFORE BIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHist JUSTICE).
MAN SHUN W✪ r. 8,18,8, CO. The hearing of this claim for the recovery of $1,863 said to have been läst ou a shipment of birds' nests, was concluderi,
865
or
His Fordship grauted the application.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION,
AN OPLUM TRANSACTION
The Man Lang firm suel the Wing Mat Yuen to recover $800, munay advanced on a case of opium.
Mr C. F. Dixon (of Mr Jobu Hastings' offices appeared for plaintiffs and Mr. G. E. Morrell (of Messrs. Deunys and Bowley; for defendants.
Mr. Dixon stated that the plaintiff's handed the amount claimed to the defendants ou
0701
Jauniry th in part payment of a case of Patos optum, delivery of which case the defendan's
since countermaaded. had
The plaintiff. business in Canton, but had n carriel manager here whose duty it was to bay good- and forward them ou to Canton. On January th he entered into a contract with the defendants for the purchase of a case of opium, received au invoics from them and paid an amount of $600, The goods, however, were not delivered.
His Lordship Why were they not delivored? Mr. Morcoll-Bauw they didu't pay up.
The goods Mr. Dizon That may be so. cost Taols 820.6, and we only paid Sti 4),
After bearing the evidence his Lordship allowed judgment for the defendants and costs.
the
Mr. T. Sercombe Smith, before taking up Puisne Judgeship in the Straits Seulements, proce-ds to Europa on aiue mouths" leave of absence. He leaves by the ss. Mongolia to day, the Wth. instant, and will embark from B aku Pior at 11.15 am.
น