:
289
[1921] Continental Bank. [1922]
A.C.544, and the more recent case of British An: 2 Chancery 589, appear to esta clearly that the right date to fix on for calculating t of exchange is the date when the breach of contract or complained of took place. Now it would be practical,
registered, took place.
then
sible for the registering authority to ascertain the d the breach, or, wrong in respect of which Judgment lat:
the Swa
It will therefore be neces think, to fix on some other date. The date of the du to be registered can always be ascertained and will al nearer the date of the breach or wrong on which it is than the date of the registration would be. Moreover, registration was introduced to avoid the necessity of ing an action on Judgment and may, I think, reasona properly be regarded as a substitute for a Judgment in country of registration founded on the Judgment which registered. In other words, I think the registration equivalent to a Judgment in an action founded on a Ju
An
which is registered. If I am right in this view, the Scott v. Bevan to which you refer in your letter which approved of in the recent cases is a direct authority saying that the date of the Judgment to be registered i date at which the rate of exchange ought to be calculate Even if I am wrong in my view as to the analogy between tration and a Judgment founded on the Judgment to be re I think that to fix on the date of the Judgment will be sistent with the recent authorities, whereas to fix on? date of the registration will be directly opposed to th and to the reasons on which they are founded.
For the reasons I venture respectfully to think that the date
20
in Rule is clearly wrong whatever may be the correct date. If and when the question arises in the Central Office here, the date fixed on for calculating the rate of exchange will be the date of the Judgment that is being registered, at all events, unless and until some higher Tribunal decides to the contrary, or I an persuaded that the view which I suggest the correct one is wrong. I will send you a list of the authorities on the subject if you would care to have one.
I must apologise for troubling you with so long a letter. but as I have had a good deal to do with the Act and the Rules I am naturally very much interested in them and in the point you raise. I return herewith the correspondence and other documents which you enclosed in your letter.
I am, Sir,
Your Obedient Servant,
J. Wille Chin
The Under Secretary of State,
Colonial Office,
LONDON, S.W.1.
Senior Master of the Supreme Court.
-