Reports of Cases in Bankruptcy

CANAL SHARES.
Where a company is formed by act of
parliament for the purchase of lands
to make a canal, and the act declares
that the shares "shall be deemed
personal estate and shall be trans-
missible as such:" Held, that
though the profits arose out of the
land, the shares were personal pro-
perty, passing as such to the assig-
nees on the bankruptcy of a pro-
prietor.

Where an act prescribes certain forms
in the transfer of such shares:-
Held, unless they are strictly com-
plied with, the shares remain in the
order and disposition of the bank-
rupt proprietor, the ordinary mode
of transfer not constituting an equi-
table mortgage. And though the
act only expressly relates to trans-
fers between third parties, yet it
impliedly relates to where the com-
pany are the transferees. Ex parte
Lancaster Canal Company, re Dil-
worth, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 411.

CERTIFICATE OF COMMIS-
SIONERS.

Unless certificate of Commissioner be
filed, Court cannot order a copy of
it to be delivered. Ex parte Shore,
re Lucas, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit.
531.

CERTIFICATE OF BANK-

RUPTCY.

See also ORDER TO STAY.-PETITION

TO STAY.

In 1806 P. proves a debt against the
estate of B. & Co. bankrupts, on a

bill of exchange, and dies in 1807,
appointing G. his executor; G.
becomes bankrupt in 1816, and ob-
tains his certificate in 1817: but
before that time, viz. in the years
1811, 1814, 1815, G. had, as ex-
ecutor, received three dividends on
P.'s debt, and in 1817, 1822,
and 1828 he receives three other
dividends. It afterwards turns out,
that the bill of exchange was paid
by another party in 1807, so that
no dividend was ever due.

On petition by B. & Co.'s assignees
to expunge the proof, and that G.
should refund the six dividends :-
Held, first, that it being in the na-
ture of a trust, the statute of limi-
tations did not run in favour of
G. But second, that as the first
three dividends were paid in error,
and were a legal debt against G.
and might have been proved under
his bankruptcy, the claim as to
them was barred by G.'s certifi-
cate. The other three received
since his bankruptcy were ordered
to be refunded. Ex parte Bolton,
re Baillie, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit.
556.

Form of petition to prove and stay

certificate. Ex parte Skipp, re Sin-
gleton, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 497.

It is no objection to the granting the
certificate, that the date of the sig-
natures was attached by a third per-
son, if it be so done before the
creditor signs his name.
General orders may be dispensed

with, under circumstances, in discre-
tion of Court. Ex parte Reynolds, re
Reynolds, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit.
459. S. C. 1 Mont. 508.

Where a creditor does not use due
diligence to prove his debt, he is
not entitled to petition to stay the
bankrupt's certificate, in order to
afford him time to do so, with a
view of dissenting from its allow-

ance.

An affidavit by the bankrupt in an-
swer to such a petition, filed two
days before the hearing, may be
read; but if it makes any charge
of delay against the petitioner,
which he is anxious to explain, the
Court will give him time for that
purpose, more especially if the
amount of his debt would turn the
certificate.

A petition to stay the certificate and
expunge a creditor's name from it,
who had signed it, on the ground
that he had been previously satisfied
his debt, must be served on the cre-
ditor.

A creditor, by petitioning to stay the
certificate, makes his election to
come in under the commission for
every proveable debt which may be
owing to him from the bankrupt;
and, therefore, the bankrupt must
be discharged from any action pend-
ing against him by the creditor in
respect of any such debt, before the
petition can be proceeded in.
The assignees cannot be heard on a
petition oy an individual creditor to
stay the bankrupt's certificate, al-

though they may have been served
with the petition. Ex parte Bostock,
re Wright, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit.

383.

Commissioner directed to sign certifi-
cate, although the year was omitted
to one of the signatures, when it
was preceded and followed by dates
subsequent to that of the last ex-
amination. Ex parte Shoults, re
Venson, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 531.

A. guaranteed the payment of goods
to be supplied by B. to C. C. be-
came bankrupt, and B. proved under
his commission, and afterwards
signed his certificate. A. gave him
notice not to do so:-Held, that,
nevertheless, A. was not discharged
from his liability as surety, as it
was his duty to have paid the debt
due from C. to B.; but as he neg-
lected to do so, and permitted B.
to prove
under C.'s commission,
B.'s signing the certificate was not
such an act as to alter A.'s right
without his control or consent, as
he might have paid the debt in
due time, and thereby prevented B.
from proving under the commis-

sion. Brown v. Carr, Dodgson,
and Bell, 1831. 5 Moore & P. 497.

An accountant who has been employed
in a bankruptcy, has no lien on the
bankrupt's certificate for the pay-
ment of his costs. Anon. 1831.
1 Rurs. & M. 330.
Where bankrupt's certificate stayed
to give a creditor time to prove,

and that creditor is paid, certificate
will be allowed, notwithstanding
the order to stay. Re Hall, 1832.

1 Mont. 508.

COLLUSION.

When petition is presented to stay
certificate, and petitioner then with-
draws his opposition, an affidavit of
no collusion is requisite. Ex parte
Cates, re Jackson, 1832. 1 Dea. &
Chit. 546.

COMMISSION, CONSOLI-

DATING.

See also FIAT.

Where all the creditors lived in Lon-
don, except two, a London fiat was
directed, instead of the country
commission already issued; which
last was ordered to be impounded.
Ex parte Johnson, 1832. 1 Dea.
& Chit. 221.

COMMISSION, OPENING.

See also FIAT-OPENING COMMIS-
SION-PETITIONING CREDITOR.
Personal attendance of petitioning

creditor at opening of commission
200 miles off dispensed with, on
ground of personal inconvenience.
Ex parte Ross, re Kirby, 1832.
1 Dea. & Chit. 552.

Time of opening a fiat enlarged, where
witness in support of the bank-
ruptcy keeps out of the way and is
summoned by the Commissioner to
attend on a future day. Ex parte
Fox, re Bennett, 1832. 1 Dea. &
Chit. 572.

COMMISSIONERS.

The commissioners have no power
under the 33d & 34th sections of
the 6 Geo. 4. to examine the
executors of a debtor to the bank-
rupt as to the amount of the assets
that have come to the hands of
such executor. Ex parte Solarte,
re Alzedo, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit.311.
S. C. 1 Mont. 495.

The General Order 8 March 1794,
does not authorize the commis-
sioners to order a sale of an estate
on which an annuity is charged for
payment of the value of the an-
nuity. Re Delves, 1831. 1 Mont.
492.

The examination of a third person by
commissioners is not evidence for
the formation of their judgment,
but merely a brief to enable them
Re
to interrogate the witness.
John Goodwin, 1832. 1 Mont. 304.

The solicitor for a judgment creditor
should not act as a commissioner.

1 Dea. & Chit. 525. S.C. 1 Mont.

503.

CONTINGENT DEBTS.

A bankrupt covenanted by his mar-
riage settlement, that his heirs, ex-
ecutors, &c. should, within twelve
calendar months after his decease,
pay 4,000l. to trustees, upon trust
to pay the interest to his intended
wife for her life; and after her
death, then to pay the principal sum
to the children of the marriage;
and if no children, to the wife if
she survived her husband; but if
not, then to the executors of the
husband:-Held, that this cove-
nant constituted a debt contracted
by the bankrupt, payable on a con-
tingency, and capable of valuation;
and therefore provable within the
56th section of the 6 Geo. 4. c. 16.
Ex parte Tindal, re Gibbins, 1832.
1 Dea. & Chit. 291. S. C. 1 Mont.
375, 462. 8 Bing. 402.

COPIES.

Unless certificate of commissioner be
filed, the Court cannot order a copy
of it to be delivered. Ex parte
Shore, re Lucas, 1832. 1 Dea.
& Chit. 531.

COSTS.

Books

Reports of Cases in Bankruptcy: Argued and Determined in the Court ..., Volume 1