Skip to Content

Colonial Cases

London, Bombay and Mediterranean Bank Ltd v. Benjamin, 1887

[enforcement of foreign judgments]

London, Bombay and Mediterranean Bank Ltd v. Benjamin

 

Supreme Court for China and Japan
Rennie CJ, 20 January 1887
Source: North China Herald, 26 January 1887

20th January.
Before Sir R. T. Rennie, Chief Justice.
LONDON, BOMBAY AND MEDITERRANEAN BANK LIMITED (in liquidation)
v.
BENJAMIN DAVID BENJAMIN.
Judgment was reserved.

Source: North China Herald, 2 February 1887


LAW REPORTS.
H.B.M.'s SUPREME COURT.
Shanghai, 29th Jan, 1887
Before Sir R. T. Rennie, Kt., Chief Justice.
LONDON, BOMBAY AND MEDITERRANEAN BANK LIMITED (in liquidation)
v.
BENJAMIN DAVID BENJAMIN.
.  .  .  
  His Lordship in giving judgment said - This is a suit brought to recover the sum of Tls. 10,000.74, the equivalent of a certain sum in Rupees, directed to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs, under a judgment of the High Court of Bombay, pronounced on the 7th day of December, 1880. There is an alternative claim in the petition which is, by agreement of counsel, to stand over until I have decided whether the judgment of the Bombay Court is binding upon the defendant or not.
  The facts of the case, as far as I have at present to deal with them, are clear enough, and may shortly be stated as follows:-  .  .  .  
.  .  .  
I think it equally clear that all the Bombay Court could have intended to do, by its judgment now under consideration was to enforce against the defendant whom either by reason of his mis-description in the proceedings, or from some other cause erroneously supposed to be actually within the jurisdiction the Balance Order of the High Court of Chancery and that its assumed jurisdiction was not, and could not properly have been, based upon any assumption of the defendant having contracted himself within the Forum of the Indian Courts.
  I think then that Lord Blackburn's expression of opinion in Schibbaby v. Westenholtz cannot be applicable to the present case, and on the whole I am of opinion that the judgment sued upon is not binding upon the defendant and cannot be enforced against him by this Court.

Published by Centre for Comparative Law, History and Governance at Macquarie Law School