Goldsmidt v Lord Glengall

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 11 November 1848
• Date: 11 November 1848
• Court: Court of Chancery (Ireland)

Chancery.

GOLDSMIDT

and

LORD GLENGALL.

Lynch v. NolanUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 57.

Attorney-General v. Mayor of LiverpoolENR 1 My. & Cr. 171.

Hemphill v. M'KennaUNK 6 Ir. Eq. Rep. 57.

Houlditch v. DonegalUNK 1 Dr. & Wal. 503.

Boyd v. BurkeUNK 8 Ir. Eq. Rep. 660.

Abbott v. strattonUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep 233.

608 CASES IN EQUITY. 1848. Chancery. GOLDSMIDT v. LORD GLENGALL. MESSRS. GOLDSMIDT, in 1847, presented a petition for a receiver under the Mortgage Act against Lord Glengall. After service of the conditional order for the appointment of the receiver on Lord Glengall, no further proceeding was taken until July 1848, when they presented a petition to make absolute the conditional order, stating the additional circumstance that a receiver had been apÂpointed by Norris, a puisne judgment creditor of Lord Glengall, under the Sheriffs' Act, and praying that that receiver might be extended to their mortgage. An order was made according to the prayer of this petition, by the Lord Chancellor, in chamber. Mr. Hughes and Mr. R. Walker now moved to set aside the order made in chamber, upon an affidavit stating that no notice had been served on Norris, and that after the date of the condiÂtional order a considerable sum (no amount being stated) had been paid on account of the mortgage by Lord Glengall, which was not denied in the answering affidavit. They cited Lynch v. Nolan (a) ; Attorney-General v. Mayor of Liverpool (b); Hemphill v. M.Kenna (c), to show that the suppression of the fact of the subseÂquent payments was sufficient ground for setting aside the order. Mr. Hartley and Mr. Norman, contra, argued that it was unneÂcessary, according to the practice of the Court, to give notice to Norris,* and that the payments were quite immaterial, as under the Mortgage Act (11 & 12 G. 3, c. 10), the Messrs. Goldsmidt would have been entitled to keep the receiver till all the arrears of interest were discharged; and there was no question that the year and-a-half's (a) 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 57. (6) 1 My. & Cr. 171...