should replace the same with others of equivalent
value. In pursuance of the contract, Jones

BOOK DEBTS ACT 1896-(No. 1424), 88. 2, 3
-Deposit of documents—Equitable assignment.]
Jones, a furniture warehouseman, in the ordinary
course of his business sold goods under time
payment agreements. In consideration of
advances made by one McKell, he, by a contract
in writing, agreed to deposit with McKell certain
time payment agreement forms signed and
complete as security therefor, which were to
remain the property of McKell until the full
amount of the advances and interest thereon
had been repaid; and it was further provided
that if any of the time payment agreements
should be fully paid up by the hirer, Jones

McKell. The contract was not registered under
the Book Debts Act 1896. Jones's estate was

sequestrated:-Held, that this was an equitabi
assignment of the debts due to Jones under the
time payment agreements, and was an assign-
ment of book debts within the meaning of the
Book Debts Act 1896, and therefore void for
want of registration. F.C. IN RE JONES 432
BUILDING CONTRACT- Architect, provision
for the appointment of-Waiver-Work to be
done to satisfaction of owner-Payment-Su
sequent discovery of defects.] A building
contract provided that the work set out in the
plans and specifications should be done to the
satisfaction of such architect as should be
appointed by the owner to give certificates for
progress and final payments, and that no pay-
ment should be made except on the certificate
of the architect. It also provided that the
whole of the work was to be completed to the
satisfaction of the owner. No architect was
ever appointed. The building was complete.
and the contract price paid. An action was
subsequently brought against the contracte
claiming damages for breach of contract:-
Held, (1) that the parties to the contract ha
by their conduct, waived their right to have a
architect appointed; (2) that payment of the
whole amount due under the contract was not
conclusive proof that the work had been dor
to the satisfaction of the owner:-Semble, the
provision for the appointment of the archite:
was for the benefit of the owner, and could be
waived by him. F.C. HOPPER v. MEYER 235

BUTCHERS AND ABATTOIRS ACT 1890-

-

(No. 1069), 8. 26—“ Slaughtering cattle withou
licence or in unlicensed place". Contrary t
the provisions of this Act"-Offence not speci
cally created · Penalty Mens rea-Ofjenti.
whether joint or severable-Penalty, joint of
several, liability to.] By sec. 26 of the Butchers
and Abattoirs Act 1890 it is provided (inter alia'
that "if any person shall slaughter or cause te
be slaughtered contrary to the provisions of
this Act any cattle in any house or place not
being an abattoir and not being a slaughter-
house duly licensed under this Act such person
shall forfeit and pay a sum not exceeding ten
pounds for each and every head of cattle so
slaughtered:"-Held, that the words “contrary
to the provisions of this Act" meant "r
circumstances not allowed by this Act," and
that an offence may be committed under the
section in a shire, although there is no provision
in the Act in the case of a shire, other that
sec. 26 itself, making it an offence to slaughter.
or cause to be slaughtered, cattle without &
licence or in an unlicensed place :—Held, also.

་་

BY-LAW-Legality of-Right of Court to deter-
mine- Unreasonableness-Uncertainty-Public
racecourse-Betting- Bookmaker-The Victoria
Racing Club Act 1871 (35 Vict., No. 398), ss. 10,
13, 14, 15, 17, 20, 24-Practice-"Rules of the
Supreme Court 1884"-Order XXV., r. 5—
Declaratory judgment.] The committee of the
Victoria Racing Club, purporting to act in
pursuance of the powers conferred on them by
The Victoria Racing Club Act 1871, made a
by-law, which was duly published in the
Government Gazette, and not disallowed by the
Governor in Council, in the following terms:-
53. No person shall after this by-law comes
into operation carry on upon any part of the
land vested in the chairman of the Victoria
Racing Club the vocation of a bookmaker (and
then only in such manner and to such extent as
shall not be forbidden by or in breach of the law)
unless (a) He be approved of by the com-
mittee of the club and pay to the committee in
advance such registration fee or sum as the
committee shall from time to time determine
and unless (b) He observe and comply with
such directions and conditions as may be from
time to time given by or on behalf of the
committee and unless (c) During the time he
shall be plying his vocation as aforesaid he shall
(if required) wear a badge or ticket to be
supplied by the committee which badge or
ticket shall be visible to the public and shall
have his name written or printed thereon.
Provided always that all bookmakers
approved of as aforesaid shall for the same
division of the said land be subject to the same
charges restrictions directions and conditions
and be granted the same privileges.
person offending against this by-law may be
removed from any land vested in the chairman
of the said club and shall forfeit for every such
offence the sum of five pounds to be recovered
in the manner prescribed by the twentieth
section of the said Act":-Held, that the by-law
was unreasonable and uncertain in that it
provided that no person should carry on the
vocation of a bookmaker on the said land,
which was a public racecourse, unless he-(a)
Was approved of by the committee. (b) Paid
such registration fee as the committee should
from time to time determine. (c) Observed

SO

Any

and complied with such directions and conditions
as might from time to time be given by or on
behalf of the committee. And that the by-law
was invalid, and that the plaintiff (a bookmaker)
was entitled to a declaration to such effect, and
to an injunction restraining the defendant from
enforcing it against him. Decision of A'Beckett,
J. ([1906] V.L.R. 343), reversed:-Per HODGES,
J. The Supreme Court is not deprived of the
right to determine the validity of a by-law made
under The Victoria Racing Club Act 1871 by
reason of the provisions of the said Act-(a)
that no by-law made thereunder shall be of any
force until one month after it has been sent to
the Chief Secretary and until publication of it
in the Government Gazette, and (b) that the
Governor in Council may within the month
aforesaid disallow such by-law, and (c) may
within six months from its publication in the
Government Gazette repeal such by-law. The
jurisdiction of the Court with regard to declara-
tory judgments discussed:-Per HOOD, J. A
by-law regulating betting, either publicly as a
business or privately with friends, is an inter-
ference with private rights and to be valid

must therefore be reasonable and certain. F.C.
COLMAN v. MILLER
622

CAPITAL OR INCOME-Tenant for life and
remainderman-Life assurance fund
See COMPANY.

[641

CASES-continued.

Lawson v. Watson (1 Legge (N.S.W.) 666).
Applied by High Court of Australia.
LEVISTON V. NARRACAN, SHIRE OF 553
Lethbridge v. Winter (1 Camp. 263 (n.)).
Followed by A' Beckett, J. LEVISTON V.
1

SHIRE OF NARRACAN

Leviston v. Narracan, Shire of ([1906]
V.L.R. 1).

Affirmed by High Court of Australia.
LEVISTON V. NARRACAN, SHIRE OF 553
Macmanamny v. McCulloch (18 A.L.T. 164).
Followed by A'Beckett, J. ROGERSON
v. PHILLIPS AND O'HAGAN
272
Mann v. Brodie (10 App. Cas. 378).
Principle of applied by A'Beckett, J.,
and by the High Court of Australia.
LEVISTON v. SHIRE OF NARRACAN
[1, 553
Marriott v. Chamberlain (17 Q.B.D. 154).
Distinguished by Hodges, J. NATIONAL
STARCH Co. v. ROBERT HARPER AND
Co.
8
Marshall v. Colonial Bank (1 C.L.R. 632,
at p. 661).

Dictum in, explained by High Court of
Australia. AUSTIN v. AUSTIN 258
Martin v. O'Sullivan (24 V.L.R. 856).
Explained by Cussen, J. LARKIN V.
PENFOLD

8

Maynard, In re (12 V.L.R. 313).

535

Speight v. Gaunt (9 App. Cas. 1).
Observations by Lord Blackburn ap-
proved and applied by High Court of
Australia. AUSTIN v. AUSTIN 258
Stevenson, In re (19 V.L.R. 660).
Overruled by High Court of Australia.
WHITELAW, IN RE
566

Stone v. Epple ([1906] V.L.R. 82).
Affirmed by High Court of Australia.
STONE v. EPPLE
386

Thornhill, In re (3 W.W. & A'B.

(Eq.)
110).
Applied by Cussen, J. VANCE, IN RE
[664
Trustees Executors, etc., Co. v. Butler
([1905] V.L.R. 650).

-

Affirmed by High Court of Australia.
BUTLER V. TRUSTEES EXECUTORS, ETC.,
Co.
552
Weigall v. Gaston (3 V.L.R. (L.) 294).
Followed by Chomley, J. ROBERTSON
v FINK

554

costs

Foreign company.

See PRACTICE.

18.

393

Security for
401

Contract with Agreement implied from
articles of association and conduct Statute
of Frauds-"Note or memorandum of agree.
ment-Instruments Act 1890 (No. 1103), s. 208—
Waiver.] The articles of association of a
company may express the terms upon which a
person may contract with such company, and,
if acted upon, an agreement between him and
the company upon which either party may sue,
may be implied partly from the articles and
partly from the conduct of the parties. Ne
British Iron Company, In re, Ex parte Beckwith
([1898] Ch. 324) and Isaacs' Case ([1892) 2
Ch. 158) followed and applied. In re Dale and
Plant (1 Megone's Report 338; [1889] 61 LT.
206), and The Northumberland Avenue Hotel Co.
([1886] 33 Ch. D. 16), distinguished. Article
55 of the P. Company, so far as material, was in
the following terms:-"B. G. and
shall be the first managing directors of the P
Company and the said B. G. shall hold such
office for the term of ten years
from the 1st August 1900. The said B. G shall