The Queen (at the prosecution of Robert Cochrane) v William F. Littledale

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date28 June 1882
Date28 June 1882
CourtCourt of Appeal (Ireland)

Appeal.

Before LAW, C, PALLES, C. B., DEASY and FITZ GIBBON, L.JJ.

THE QUEEN (AT THE PROSECUTION OF ROBERT COCHRANE)
and
WILLIAM F. LITTLEDALE

Pearse v. MorriceENR 2 Ad. & E. 96.

Payne v. Mayor of BreconENR 3 H. & N. 572.

Earl of Donoughmore v. ForrestUNK Ir. R. 5 C. L. 449.

In re Coltman, Coltman v. Coltman 19 Ch. Div. 64.

Julius v. Bishop of OxfordELR 5 App. Cas. 214.

Sharp v. TayorENR 2 Phill. 801.

Cope v. RowlandsENR 2 M. & W. 149.

Ritchie v. SmithENR 6 C. B. 462.

Stewart v. Gibson 7 Cl. & F.729.

The King v. the Nottingham Old Waterworks Company 6 Ad. & Ell. 372.

The King v. Murray 1 H. & B. 127.

The King v. Archbishop of CanterburyENR 8 East, 213.

Holman v. Johnson Cowp. 314.

Regina v. Churchwardens of All Saints, WiganELR 1 App. Cas. 611.

Deposits in savings banks Money deposited in fictitious names Illegality 26 & 27 Vict. c. 87, ss. 38, 48 38 & 39 Vict, c. 60, s. 2 39 & 40 Vict, c. 52 Mandamus Practice.

Yon. XII.] Q. B., C. P., & EX. DIVISIONS. the ground of variances in the recognizance. In them the question was between the respondent and appellant. Here the oonusor of the recognizance insists that the document is void ; but the recogÂÂnizance having been acted upon in support of the appeal which was duly heard, it seems to me that the objection raised is not open to the Defendant, who is bound by something in the nature of an estoppel, and, I think, the Judge at the Assizes should have reversed the dismiss of the Chairman. Solicitor for the Appellant : O'Dwyer. Solicitor for the Respondent : B. Rice. THE Q UEEN (AT THE PROSECUTION OF ROBERT COCHRANE) v. WILLIAM F. LITTLEDALE (1). Deposits in savings banks-Money deposited in fictitious names-illegalityÂÂ26 4, 27 Vict. c. 87, ss. 38, 48-38 4- 39 Vict. c. 60, s. 2-39 4. 40 Vict. c. 52-Mandamus-Practice. By the 26 & 27 Viet. c. 87, sect. 38, it is provided that it shall not be lawful for a depositor in a savings bank to make any deposit in any other account at the same or any other savings bank; and that every depositor at the time of the first deposit, and at such other times as such depositor shall be required so to do by the trustees and managers of the bank, shall make a declaration that he is not entitled to any deposit in or any benefit from the funds of any savings bank other than that into which such deposit shall be made, or any other funds in the said savings bank ; and if such declaration shall not be true, or if any person shall, at any time, have any deposit or funds in more than one savings bank within the United Kingdom, except as provided by the Act, every such person shall, if such deposit is, in the opinion of the Barrister-at-law appointed under the Act, made with a frauduÂÂlent intention, forfeit all right to any deposit in or funds of any and every such savings bank. By section 48, it is provided that, if any dispute shall arise between the trustees and managers of any savings bank and any inÂÂdividual depositor therein, or his personal representatives, claiming to be entitled to any money deposited in such savings bank, the matter in dispute shall be referred to the Barrister appointed under the Act, whose award shall be binding and conclusive. By the 39 & 40 Vict. c. 52, s. 2, the duty (1) Before LAW, C., PALLES, C. B., DEASY and FITZ Gisnorr, L.JJ. Von. XII. LAW REPORTS (IRELAND). [L. 11. I. of determining any such disputes was transferred to the Assistant-Registrar of Friendly Societies in Ireland. C., after the passing of the Act 26 & 27 Vict. c. 87, placed various sums of money on deposit in a savings bank in fictitious names, with, however, the knowledge of the officers of the bank. He had also deposits remaining in his own name previously made. The deposits in the aggregate exceeded conÂÂsiderably 200, notwithstanding that the Commissioners for the reduction of the National Debt had directed that the trustees of any savings bank should. not add interest to any annual account so long as it continued at or above 200. C. died in 1880, leaving these moneys on deposit. His personal reÂÂpresentatives claimed them, but the trustees refused to pay the sums deposited in fictitious names. On an application by C.'s personal representatives for a mandamus to the Assistant-Registrar of Friendly...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT