Perry v Stratham, Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Court | Supreme Court (Irish Free State) |
| Judgment Date | 30 July 1928 |
| Date | 30 July 1928 |
Application to the Supreme Court - Respondent in an appeal to Supreme Court applying for order - Appellant resident in England - Jurisdiction of Supreme Court - "Special circumstances" entitling a respondent to an order - Rules of the Supreme Court (Ireland), 1905, Or. LVIII., r. 15.
An unsuccessful plaintiff in an action tried in the High Court for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by him through the negligence of the defendants served notice of appeal to the Supreme Court, applying for a new trial. The defendants thereupon applied to the Supreme Court for an order requiring the plaintiff to give security for the costs of the appeal. The plaintiff was not resident in the Irish Free State, being ordinarily resident in London. The defendants alleged that the plaintiff had no assets in the Irish Free State: —Held by the Supreme Court that the defendants were entitled to the order sought. Neither the fact that a party is resident in England, nor his poverty alone, is a sufficient justification for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Framus Ltd v CRH Plc
...IRELAND FINANCE LTD 1992 2 IR 57 RSC O.29 COMPANIES ACT 1908 S278 SEE CO LTD V PUBLIC LIGHTING SERVICES 1987 ILRM 255 PERRY V STRATHAM 1928 IR 580 FANNON V AN BORD PLEANALA 1992 2 IR 380 1 Murray, J. delivered on the 22nd day of April, 2 The plaintiffs, who are the appellants in these p......
-
West Donegal Land League Ltd v Udaras Na Gaeltachta
...15/5/2006)[2006] IESC 29, [2007] 1 ILRM 1 West Donegal Land League Ltd v Údarás naGaeltachta COMPANIES ACT 1963 S390 PERRY v STRATHAM LTD 1928 IR 580 FALLON v BORD PLEANALA 1992 2 IR 380 MALAHIDE COMMUNITY COUNCIL LTD v FINGAL CO COUNCIL 1997 3 IR 383 HOUSTON v UDARAS NA GAELTACHTA & ORS......
-
Irish Press Plc v Warburg Pincus Company International Ltd
...& ANOR V BRODRENE GRAM A/S UNREP COSTELLO 21.7.94 1994/8/2243 BEAUCROSS LTD V KENNEDY UNREP MORRIS 18.10.95 1995/15/3854 PERRY V STRAITHAM 1928 IR 580 Synopsis: Practice & Procedure S.390 Companies Act 1963; security for costs; whether funds available to meet costs if payable Held: Applica......
-
Coolbrook Developments Ltd v Lington Development Ltd
...that part of the judgment of Kingsmill Moore J. in the case which referred to the earlier dicta of Fitzgibbon J. in Perry v. Stratham [1928] I.R. 580 ('Perry'). There, Fitzgibbon J stated: ' It must be borne in mind that security is not intended either as an indemnity against all costs whic......