legislation in order to confer this right upon the Judges; but I incline to think that due to a lacuna together may suffice to give jurisdiction in Chambers. Judged by a General order when passed,
are trying,
the
Please spare some time, for if the Judges are to deal with the difficulties of the Gibbons case; and besides it,
unmay
h
requisite to cure their past omissions -
M. Hubut
J.
17.12.
Mr. Wingfield & I have discussed this question,
we think that both section of the Bankruptcy Ordinance? 564
Until 1873 & in that year
A
is Probably sufficient to authorise the Chief Justice to with ease and the Exercise Bankruptcy Jurisdiction in Chambers; the question is not free from difficulty.
is to
should owing to the
to the fact, that it was thought necessary
in dealing with Private Matters by one. 8 of 1860 to enact two sections 20.421 specifically giving this power to the Judges and that in the end 18 of 1873
for think the then existing Supreme Court Ord. 60. 1846.5
dec. 23-(as amended by 207-1846) which had empowered
the Chief Justice to make a Tack on order prescribing what portions of their business should be taken in Chambers; and that a similar
power of making a General Order for the like purpose
was
confined to see. 7 (1) of the Bankruptcy Ord = ; But in the absence of any Rule the Judges
to exercise their discretion as to the business which might
or might not be taken in Chambers in thing were bound to sit in Court: unless they could fall back, upon the English
rules under the proviso to see. 7: We are however unable
agree with the Judges that that Jurisdiction
to
can be taken to supply the want of a rule of general
precedent such as here required -
421
411
And it would seem advisable to direct the Judge to introduce an
Ordinance which shall remove well
Ambition hence
The
Any
subject in the future, as the same
defects of jurisdiction that might be
set forward as to the fact.
a state of
Mash
with the Attorney General & the Judges holding different views upon such a subject, it is unsafe to leave things as they are; uncertainty is undesirable in any matter Affecting the administration of justice, and therefore the discussion should I remain without delay-
1. h
It
may
I question whether the Judge should Express
Any opinion when the law passed the day or content himself with directing legislation.
J-13/1~
I refer Ew 20.12
ари
Mußranston.
I touch upon Gibbons Matter on another
paper that it is undesirable in
interests
well
A
the public
of questionable legality,
for the Judges to transact Bankruptcy business
+
in Chambers.
I think and some
Mary
cci
this ? and is not it Doubtful whether the Colonial Supreme Court Judges, also necessary
not always to cry wise men,
Should have
20.
legislation in order to confer this right upon the Judges; but I'incline to think that due to a y (1) darken together may suffice to gur jurisdiction in Chambers Junided a General order wen papsul
are toring,
the
Please spente tome, for if the Judges and to the difficulties of the Gibbons case ; and bisider
it.
unmay
h
sguisite to cure their past outs -
M. Hubut
J.
17.12.
Mr. Wingfield & I have discussed this question,
we think that the both section of the Bankrupting Beiname? 564
}
Until 1873 & in that hein
A
is Inobably sufficient to authorise the Chief Justin, to with June and the Exercise Bankruptey Jurisdiction in Chambus; the question
not be from difficulty.
is t
should coving to the
to the fast, that it was thought resessing
in dealing with Perbate Mathers by one. 8 of 1860 to emast two Lections 20.421 specifically giving this proven to the Judges and that in the end 18 of 1873
for think the then existing Supreme Court Ord. 60. 1846.5
dec. 23-(as amendue. by 207-1846) women han sampowered
the Chief Justic to make a Tack on orden prescribing what portions of ther Musings should be taken in Chambers; and that a similar
Jower of making a General Order for the like. purpose
ww
confined to see. 7 (1) Wthe Bankrupty Md = ; But in the absence of any Rule the Judges
to exercise their discretion as to the business which might
won not competat on might not be taken in Chambres in thing worn bound to sit in Cont: unless they conee fall back, upon the English
rules under the Praise to see. 7: We are howann unable
agree with the Jucks that that Jumiss
to
anfily
be taken to supply the way of a rule of general
preden such as here regaine -
421
411
And it would deem advisable to direct the Journ to introduce an
Minoman which shall remar well
Ambtion hine
The
Any
subject in the future, sat the same
defects of jurisdiction that might be
fuck forward as to the fast.
a state of
Mash
with the Atting frusse & the Judges holding diffent views upon such a subject, it is unsafe then things as they are; uncertainty is undesirable in any maths Affecting the administration of juster, a therefore the disk shace I remane without delay-
1. h
It
may
I aguestion whether the dogs. shmere Eques
Any opinion when the law past the day or contut himself with directing legislation.
J-13/1~
I aper Ew 20.12
ари
Mußranston.
I teach her Gibbons Mected on another
paper that it is undeorralle in
interests
well
A
the publi
of questionate legality,
for the pedges to transact Bankruptes banniss
+
in Chambers.
I teen and some
Marry
cci
this ? and is not it Exubtful Mellien the Colonial Supreme Cant fudges, also neces
not always to cry wise men,
Shuld hau
20.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.