Armstrong v Armstrong

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 12 November 1872
• Date: 12 November 1872
• Court: Chancery Division (Ireland)

V. C. Court.

ARMSTRONG

and

ARMSTRONG.

Perrin v. Hengler Ir. R. 4 Eq. 614.

Connolly v. Smyth Ir. R. 3 Eq. 145.

Butler v. TroyIR 7 I. E. R. 70.

Carey v. BrowneUNK 4 Ir. Ch. Rep. 210.

Thompson v. PartridgeENR 4 De G. M. & G. 794.

Hoban v. Hutchinson I. R. 4 Eq. 607.

Hastings v. Dwyer Ibid. 611.

Thexton v. EdmonstonELR L. R. 5 Eq. 373.

Douglas v. ArchbuttENR 23 Beav. 293.

Ferrand v. The Corporation of BradfordENR 21 Beav. 422.

Evidence — Reception of, after time fixed for closing — Discretion of Court —— G. O. 157 & Practice.

84 THE IRISH REPORTS. [t. P. V. C. Court. ARMSTRONG v. ARMSTRONG. 1872. Evidence-Reception of, after time fixed for closing-Discretion of Court...- Nov. 11, 12. Chancery Act (1867) 88. 105,164-G. 0. 157-Practice. 1. In exercising the discretion given by the 164th section of the Chancery Act, 1867, the Court will carefully examine the special circumstances of each ease, to ascertain whether there is any risk in allowing a deviation from the or dinary rules of practice. 2. Where the Plaintiff applied for leave to use, at the hearing of a cause, affidavits and depositions, most of which had been made within the proper time, but, through misapprehension, none of them filed till after it, the Court, on being satisfied as to bona fides, and that no injury could result to the DefendÂÂant, granted the application. MOTION that the Plaintiff might be at liberty to use, at the hearing of the cause, certain affidavits and depositions, of the filing of which, on the 8th, 16th, and 29th of October, 1872, the DefendÂÂants had received notice, notwithstanding that the time for filing same, as limited by an order at Chambers, had expired on the 1st of said month of October ; and that the Plaintiff and Defendants might have fourteen days for giving notice (if so advised) of cross-examining all or any of the parties who had given evidence in the cause. The bill was filed on the 13th of June, 1871, for the purpose of setting aside a certain indenture as fraudulent and void. There were six Defendants, all of whom appeared; and three, who had been served with interrogatories, having duly answered, the Plaintiff filed a replication on the 22nd of March, 1872. The " eight weeks" allowed (by G. 0. 157) for closing the evidence, therefore, terminated on the 17th of May ; but, on the consent of the parties, by order at Chambers of the 4th of June, such time was enlarged to the 1st of October, 1872. The affidavit of the Plaintiff's solicitor (filed Nov. 7), on which the present motion was grounded, stated that the evidence intended to be used by the...