Malone v Ross

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1900
• Date: 01 January 1900
• Court: King's Bench Division (Ireland)

Malone

and

Ross.

586 THE IRISH REPORTS. [1900. Appeal, that a judgment by consent or by default raises an estoppel just 19Q0"_in the same way as a judgment after the Court has exercised a Irish Land jU(jicjai discretion in the matter." In this I agree, and if after Commission j ' v. pleadings aud joinder of issue, one or other party makes default Kyan' and a judgment follows, the case ought to be dealt with just as if Holmes, L.J. ft jia i p,een decided by the Court. But the proposition which I desire to keep open is whether a judgment obtained in default of appearance is under any circumstances conclusive of anything beyond what appears on the face of the judgment itself. For these reasons, I am of opinion that the first question ought to be answered iu the affirmative. Solicitor for the plaintiffs : W. Alexander. Solicitor for the defendants: S. J. Ryan. g. y. d. MALONE v. BOSS (1). SheriffFees and expensesInterpleaderExpense of keeping live stock CostsLiability of successful claimant. An interpleader order directed the sheriff to sell certain live stock seized under a writ of fi. fa. unless security were given by the claimants. The claimants failed to give security, and the sheriff sold the live stock, and paid the proceeds into Court. The interpleader issues were decided in favour of the claimants: Held, that the sheriff was entitled to be paid out of the fund in Court all costs of the interpleader order, and also all proper expenses of agisting the live stock, but not his fees for executing the writ. Appeal from the order of the Queen's Bench Division, dated the 27th January, 1899, making no rule upon a motion on behalf of the sheriff that a sum of £24 8s. 6d. lodged in Court pursuant to an interpleader order should be paid out to him in satisfaction of the sum of £23 18s. 2d. due for livery of one horse, two colts, (1) Before Lorij Ashbourne, C, and Fitz Gibbon, Wai.kee, and Holmes, L.JJ. Appeal. 1899. Feb. 22. April 20. Vol. II.] QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. aud three cows seized under a writ of fieri facias issued in the action and for auctioneer's fees, poundage, warrant, mileage, and bailiff's fees connected with the seizure and sale, and for costs of the interpleader. On May 2, 1895, the writ of fieri facias was issued and lodged with the sheriff, marked for the sum of £150 debt, aud £91 17s. 8d. costs, making together the sum of £241 17s. 8d. Under this writ, the sheriff on May 21, 1895, seized one horse, two colts, aud three cows, which he believed belonged to the defendant. Thomas Dagg claimed two of the cows so seized, and George Thompson claimed the horse, two colts, and one cow, the residue of the property seized. The sheriff thereupon put the said live stock at livery. On June 1, 1895, the sheriff obtained an interpleader order, whereby amongst other things it was ordered that the sheriff should be at liberty to deliver up the said goods and chattels to the said claimants respectively upon receiving satisfactory .security therefor within ten days from the date of the order, and in default that the sheriff should be at liberty to sell the said goods and chattels, and to bring the proceeds thereof into Court to abide further order, aud that the question of costs and expenses of all parties should remain over until the return of the issues thereby directed to be tried. Not having received satisfactory security within the time limited by the said order, the sheriff sold the said goods and chattels by public auction on June 17, 1895, and realized by such sale the sum of £24 8s. 6d., which sum he lodged in Court. The sheriff had to pay £15 8s. for livery...