Colkey v London and North-Western Railway Company

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 12 December 1904
• Date: 12 December 1904
• Docket Number: (1904. No. 13,093.)
• Court: King's Bench Division (Ireland)

COLKEY

and

LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY CO.

(1904. No. 13,093.)

K. B. Div.

Practice — Railway Company — Principal office in England —— Special mode of service — Substitution of service not allowable — Writ of summons containing a false address within the jurisdiction — Setting aside writ ——

Attorney-General v. Drapers' Co.IR [1894] 1 I. R. 185.

Fry v. MooreELR 23 Q. B. D. 395.

Garton v. Great Western Railway Co.ENR E. B. & E. 827.

Jones v. Scottish Accident Insurance Co.ELR 17 Q. B. D. 421.

La BourgogneELR [1899] P. 1.

La Compagnie G‚n‚rale Transatlantique v. LawELR [1899] A. C. 431.

Lenders v. AndersonELR 12 Q. B. D. 59, at p. 55.

Lewis v. HerbertUNK 16 L. R. Ir. 340.

Logan v. the Bank of ScotlandELR [1904] 2 K. B. 495.

O'Connor v. Star Co.UNK 30 L. R. Ir. 1.

Palmer v. Caledonian Railway Co.ELR [1892] 1 Q. B. 823.

Re BusfieldELR 32 Ch. D. 123.

Re CliffELR [1895] 2 Ch. D. 21.

Re EagerELR 22 Ch. D. 86.

Rowan v. Sharpe 1 New Ir. Jur. R. 82.

The W. A. SholtenELR 13 P. D. 8.

Watkins v. Scottish Imperial Insurance Co.ELR 23 Q. B. D. 285.

Welding v. BeanELR [1891] 1 Q. B. 100.

Vox,. II.] KING'S BENCH DIVISION. 251 thus got the immediate return of his cattle. He was not at liberty K. B. Div. then to stop short. He did, in fact, stop short, but the execution 1904. creditor had not withdrawn, and the jurisdiction which the claimant WALSH v. had invoked required him to proceed in the manner prescribed by G _ OOLIMAN. section 150, to have his claim adjudicated on by the County Court Johnson, J. Judge, and he ought to have gone on and served his interpleader civil bill on the execution creditor, and proceeded accordingly. The sheriff holds the money, and is liable for it. He cannot part with it except on a legal acquittance, pursuant to the provisions of section 150, unless the execution creditor authorises him to pay the money over to the claimant, who is found by the learned Judge to be the owner of the cattle, now represented by the money. If the execution creditor does not do that, I quite agree that the sheriff has no alternative but to hand the money over to the execution creditor, and let the claimant follow it in his hands. Solicitors for the plaintiff : Creagh sf Byrne. Solicitors for the defendant : F. C. Downing. J. L. CLOKEY v. LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN K. B. Div. RAILWAY CO. (1). 1904. Dec. 12. (1904. No. 13,093.) Practice—Railway Company—Principal office in England—.Railways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, s. 135—Special mode of service—Substitution of service not allowable—Writ of summons containing a false address within the jurisdiction—Setting aside writ—Order IX., Br. 5, 11—Order XI., B. 1 (e). Where there is a statutory provision regulating service of process upon a defendant, by which such process ought to be served out of the jurisdiction, service of a writ of summons cannot be effected under Order IX., Rule 2, on an agent within the jurisdiction ; and service of the writ in an action not within Order XI., Rule 1, cannot be substituted under Order IX., Rule 5, on such an agent. (1) Before PALLES, C.B., and JOHNSON and GinsoN, J J 252 THE IRISH REPORTS'. [1905. jC. B. Div. The principal office of a Railway Company, within sect. 135 of the Rail 1904. ways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, is the head office where the government CLoKcy of the railway is carried on. v. Where the true address of a defendant, known to the plaintiff, is out of L. &N.-W. . dicti the jurison, the deliberate insertion in the writ of a false address within RAILWAY Co. the jurisdiction is a violation of the Rules in that behalf, and such a writ will be set aside. Lewis v. _Herbert (16 L. R. Ir. 340) observed upon. Mono/ to set aside the writ of summons, and to discharge an order of Boyd, J., dated the 4th November, 1904, whereby it was ordered that service of the writ and of the order to be made personally on H. G. Burgess, the manager of the defendants in this country, be good and sufficient service of the writ on the defendants. The writ was endorsed with a claim for damages for breach of duty in and about the carriage of a quantity of margarine and loss sustained through damage thereto by the defendants when carrying same ; and the defendants' address, endorsed thereon, was North Wall, Dublin. The...