English Cases.

Progress, Volume I, Issue 9, 2 July 1906, Page 227

English Cases.

Husband and Wife. Contract by Wife. Married Women's Property Acts. — By section 2 of " The Married Women's Property Act, 1894" (N.Z.) "Every contract hereafter entered into by a married woman otherwise than as an agent shall be deemed to be a contract entered into by her with respect to and to bind her separate property. The English statute is identical. Mrs. Holden had large dealings with her dressmakers, Paquin Limited. She merely gave her married name and address, was debited by her married name, and paid the bills sent into her by her own cheques. Her husband, who had approved of her dealing with Paquin Ltd. and seen her wearing the dresses purchased, became insolvent and absconded. Paquin Ltd. sued her for the balance owing. Held by the House of Lords that she entered into the contract as agent for her husband and was therefore not liable, and that if a wife in fact contracts as an agent for her husband, she does not contract " otherwise than as an agent," and it is immaterial whether or not when the contract was made the tradesman knew that she had her husband's authority or even knew she was a married woman. — Paquin Limited v. Beauclerk (formerly Holden) 1906. H.L. 148. The Truck Act. Set off of Debt. — Section 5 of " The Truck Act, 1891 " provides that " The entire amount of the wages earned by or payable to any workman shall be actually paid to such workman in money and not otherwise. The corresponding section of the English Act is similar, but uses the words " in current coin of the realm " in lieu of money. The defendant Company obtained an order from a court of petty sessions for payment of a fine by the plaintiff, a workman in its employ, for having absented himself without leave. Next pay day the Company deducted the fine from the plaintiff's wages, and paid him the balance. Held by the House of Lords that the deduction was illegal as a contravention of the Truck Act. — Williams v North's Navigation Collieries (1889) Ltd. Debtor and Creditor. Promise to Pay Debt by Instalments. — The mere payment by a debtor of part of a debt immediately due, accompanied by a promise to pay the balance by instalments, although such part payment and promise are accepted by the creditor, is a mere indulgence by the creditor and affords no consideration for a promise by the execution creditor, -who has put m an execution upon the goods of the debtor, to withdraw the sheriff. The debtor has therefore no remedy if the creditor fails to withdraw the sheriff. — Hookham v. Moyle. 22 Times. L.R. 241.

Landlord and Tenant. Distress. — Section 7 of " The Distress Act, 1885 " exempts from distress for rent (inter aha) tools of trade to an amount not exceeding In England there is a similar exemption to the value of £5 only. A cab of the value of was hired by a cab driver and used by him to earn his livelihood. The cab was seized under a distress for rent due from the cab driver. There was nothing else upon the premises which could be seized. Held that it was an implement of trade and that as there were no other chattels seizable it was an exempt from seizure. — Lavell v. Ritchwgs. 22 Times. L.R. 316. Restraint of Trade. — Mr. Calfe, on entering the service of Mr. Cade, a coal merchant, covenanted that he would not within 2 years after leaving Mr. Cade's employment, " either directly or indirectly be engaged, concerned, or interested in, or carry on the trade or business of a coal merchant " within 3 miles from King's Cross. On leaving Mr. Cade, he entered the service of a rival coal merchant within the prohibited area and solicited ordeis from Mr. Cade's customers. An injunction was granted restraining him from doing so and it was held a breach of the covenant to become a servant of another employer carrying on a similar business. — Cade v. Calfe. 22 Times L.R. 243.