The Agricultural Bank v Nugent

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 24 January 1843
• Date: 24 January 1843
• Court: Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)

Queen's Bench.

THE AGRICULTURAL BANK

and

NUGENT.

Keatinge V. Keatinge 2 Jon. 149.

Hozier V. Powell 6 Law Rec. N.S. 288.

Edwards V. LucasENR 5 B. & C. 339.

Pierson V. Fahy J. & Bou. 42.

CASES AT LAW. 357 H. T. 1843. Queen'sBench. THE AGRICULTURAL BANK v. NUGENT. Jan. 24. SCIRE FAcIAs.-The writ recited a judgment obtained by the plaintiff, by reason of a certain plea of trespass on the case, as for his costs and expenses.-Plea, nul tiel record. On the production of the record, it appeared that the judgment was for damages sustained by reason of the non-fulfilment of the said several assumptions and promises, as also for costs and expenses. Mr. Ardagh, in support of the plea, cited Keatinge v. Keatinge (a), Hazier v. Powell (b), Edwards v. Lucas (c). Mr. Moore, Q. C., and Mr. Rogers, contra. CRAMPTON, J. In every case which has been cited, there was a positive inconsistency; it is contended here that there may be an inconsistency, but in order to show a variance, there must be an actual inconsistency, not a possibility of a variance. This distinction is taken in the case of Pierson v. Fahy (d). The CouRT-having...