LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1057, 21 February 1911, Page 3

LAW REPORTS.

1 SUPREME COURT. SOME PARTNERSHIP SHARES. AND PROOF OF DEBT. •' Reserved judgment was delivered by ■ Mr. Justice. Chapman yesterday in tllo caso Hudson, Marriott, and Co. (land, Block, and commission agents, Levin, in liquidation), in which an application had been made calling upon Marriott, ono of the members of tho company, which consisted of the two shareholders, to show cause why his proof of debt should not be rejected by tho official liquidator. Marriott had proved for Xl5O, being 15 promissory notes of JEIO each, which had been given by; Hudson to him, and endorsed by the company, for thu salo to Hudsou of his (Marriott's) shares in tho companr. Tho question for his Honour to docido was wnothcr it was necessary for Marriott to prove that tho company had received consideration on tho transaction. .'!'■' „ -■ >This (said his Honour) was a proceeding by a person who alleged himself to be a creditor, and who sought to establish the liability of tho company, to himself ns endorser of a set of promissory notes. The claim was rcsistcd'on tho ground that tho company had received no conlideration, anil had no interest whatever in tho transaction..and that, by it, Hudson, for his own accommodation, '- put Marriott into competition with tho company's creditors, Marriott knowing tho exact ■ position when • ho took tho notes. Marriott asked Hudson to endorse these notes in support of a private transaction in which they were both interested, and in which the company was in no!sense interested. Hudson did this,'.Marriott being fully awaro of the whole circumstances. To his Honour's mind it was ' quite clear that this could not bo allowed—as clear as if, to tho knowledge of the holder, a debtor gave a cheque on a trust account, for his own debt to a personal creditor who knew ho hod no ' right to do so, and that nothing was ' owing ; him by tho trust estate. His .Honour said that he could add that Marriott gave his evidence frankly. He evidently considered that he had'a right to demand and obtain the endorsement when he hnd made Hudson tho sole . owner of tho company, and its assets. Jn this' he was mistaken. Tho application was dismissed, with costs £t 4s. Mr. G. Tooeood nnpeared for Marriott. Mr. H. P. Von Haast for the official liquidator.