FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY

*680 Danish Mercantile Co. Ld.

and Others v Bea!ont and
Another.
Image 1 in PDF format. Available for Offline Print
Court of Appeal
4 April 1951
"#$%& D. '%$.(
"#$%#( Ch. ')&
Jenkins an !oson " #.JJ.
1951 Apr. 4.
Pra$ti$e%Appli$ation to strike out name of plaintiff $ompan&%
Aoption of pro$eeings b& li'uiator%(ffe$t.
)*ere pro$eeings are starte in t*e name of a plaintiff +it*out
proper aut*orit&" so long as t*e matter rests t*ere" t*e a$tion is not
properl& $onstitute. In t*at sense it is a nullit& an $an be sta&e
at an& time" provie t*at t*e aggrieve efenant oes not unul&
ela& *is appli$ation. It is" *o+ever" open at an& time to t*e
purporte plaintiff to ratif& t*e a$t of t*e soli$itor +*o starte t*e
a$tion" an to aopt t*e pro$eeings. )*en t*at *as been one"
t*en" in a$$oran$e +it* t*e orinar& la+ of prin$ipal an agent"
an in a$$oran$e +it* t*e orinar& o$trine of ratifi$ation" t*e
efe$t in t*e pro$eeings as orinar& $onstitute is $ure" an it is
no longer open to t*e efenant to ob,e$t t*at t*e pro$eeings t*en
ratifie an aopte +ere in t*e first instan$e broug*t +it*out
proper aut*orit&.
-e&nols v. !o+ell .1/012 #. -. / 3. 4. 19/ 5 #onon an 4la$k+all
-&. Co. v. Cross .1//52 11 C*. D. 154 " an Aams v. #onon
Improve 6otor Coa$* 4uilers #. 719819 1 :. 4.
495 $onsiere. *681
APP(A# from -o;burg*" J.
<*e first plaintiffs" Danis* 6er$antile Co. #." +ere in$orporate on
April 1=" 1949" +it* a s*are $apital of 8"===l. o+ne an $ontrolle
in e'ual proportions b& one >*erian" a 4ritis* sub,e$t" an one
!o&er" a Danis* sub,e$t" +*o +ere t*e onl& ire$tors. <*e $ompan&
+as forme to import an sell in t*is $ountr& agri$ultural ma$*iner&
manufa$ture in Denmark. <*e ma$*iner& +as mae b& a Danis*
manufa$turing $ompan& $alle 6as Amb&" sol to a Danis* firm
$alle Dane$o" in +*i$* !o&er +as intereste" an resol b& Dane$o
to t*e plaintiff $ompan&.
4& a managing ire$tor?s agreement ate 6a& 4" 1949" bet+een
t*e $ompan&" !o&er an >*erian t*e latter +as given +ie po+ers
of management. <*e agreement in$lue a provision t*at @6r.
>*erian s*all manage an $onu$t t*e affairs of t*e $ompan& as
*e in *is sole is$retion s*all t*ink fit@" an a furt*er provision t*at
ea$* of t*e parties t*ereto agree an unertook @to o all a$ts an
t*ings an e;e$ute all o$uments ne$essar& to $arr& t*is agreement
into effe$t@.
After t*e business of t*e $ompan& *a been $arrie on for a &ear"
isputes arose" +it* t*e result t*at t*e suppl& of ma$*iner& from
Denmark +as is$ontinue an ot*er arrangements +ere mae b&
!o&er or *is interests in Denmark for its marketing.
In relian$e on *is managing ire$tor?s agreement" >*erian
instru$te soli$itors to start t*is a$tion in t*e name of t*e plaintiff
$ompan&. <*e a$tion +as approve neit*er b& t*e $ompan& in
general meeting nor b& t*e boar of ire$tors before it +as starte.
<*e +rit +as issue on 6ar$* 11" 195=. Interlo$utor& pro$eeings
+ere taken an an interim in,un$tion +as grante in t*e a$tion in
April. In t*e $ourse of t*e *earing of t*at motion" $ounsel for t*e
efenants referre to t*e possibilit& of t*eir $ontening t*at t*e
pro$eeings *a been broug*t +it*out t*e aut*orit& of t*e
$ompan&. <*e efenants +ere alive to t*at matter at t*at stage.
On June 81" 195=" a petition +as presente for t*e +ining up of
t*e $ompan&" an t*e usual $ompulsor& +iningAup orer +as mae
on Bovember 4" 195=. <*e li'uiator t*en appointe aopte t*e
a$tion.
On Februar& 19" 1951" t*e efenants applie b& motion to strike
out t*e name of t*e $ompan& as plaintiff. -o;burg*" J." ismisse
t*e motion" on t*e groun t*at t*e li'uiator of t*e $ompan& *a
ratifie t*e bringing of t*e a$tion. <*e efenants appeale. *682
Shelley K.C. " an H. E. Francis for t*e efenants. <*is is an
appli$ation to strike out t*e name of t*e $ompan& as plaintiff on t*e
groun t*at t*e $ompan& +as ,oine as plaintiff +it*out its $onsent.
<*e a$tion +as a$$oringl& a nullit& an it is not open to t*e
li'uiator of t*e $ompan& to aopt it. 7<*e& referre to :eig*le&"
6a;te C Co. v. Durant
1
5 Aams v. #onon Improve 6otor Coa$*
4uilers #.
8
5 In re #or (. FitDgeral
1
" an #onon an 4la$k+all
-ail+a& Co. v. Cross
4
.9
Aldous " for t*e plaintiff $ompan&" +as not $alle on to argue.
J(B:IB>" #.J.
)*ere an a$tion is broug*t +it*out t*e aut*orit& of t*e purporte
plaintiff it is" of $ourse" +ell settle t*at t*e soli$itor on t*e re$or
for t*e purporte plaintiff be$omes personall& liable to t*e
efenants for t*e $osts of t*e a$tion.
7!is #ors*ip state t*e fa$ts" an $ontinueE9 <*e grouns on
+*i$* t*e present motion" +*i$* +as laun$*e on Februar& 19"
1951" +as oppose before t*e ,uge +ere t*eseE first" relian$e +as
pla$e on >*erian?s managing ire$tor?s agreement of 6a& 4"
1949. I +ill sa& no more about t*at agreement" be$ause I am
pro$eeing on t*e assumption t*at it +as not effe$tive to give
>*erian aut*orit&.
>e$onl&" it +as sai t*at a motion of t*is nature must be laun$*e
+it*out ela& an t*at t*ere +as su$* a ela& in t*e present $ase
as put t*e efenants out of $ourt. <*e ,uge +as mu$* impresse
b& t*e fa$ts au$e in support of t*at argument5 but" for reasons
+*i$* +ill appear" speaking for m&self I fin it unne$essar& to
e$ie +*et*er" if t*e efenants *a ot*er+ise been able to make
out a $ase of +ant of aut*orit&" t*e& +oul *ave been s*ut out from
pursuing t*is reme& on a$$ount of t*eir ela&" t*oug* I am far
from sa&ing t*at t*e ,uge +as +rong in t*e $on$lusion at +*i$* *e
arrive on t*at aspe$t of t*e $ase. I am merel& sa&ing t*at I fin it
unne$essar& to eal +it* t*at 'uestion one +a& or t*e ot*er.
<*irl&" it is sai t*at" even if it is $on$ee for t*e purposes of
argument t*at t*e pro$eeings +ere in t*e first instan$e broug*t
+it*out aut*orit&" t*e li'uiator in fa$t aopte t*e pro$eeings on
be*alf of t*e $ompan& an t*us $ure t*e original efe$t" on t*e
groun t*at su$* a ratifi$ation relates ba$k an $ures t*e +ant of
aut*orit& in t*e original a$t of t*e purporte agent" ,ust as in an&
ot*er $ase of ratifi$ation. <*e ,uge *683e$ie t*at point in
favour of t*e plaintiffs an in m& ,ugment *e +as $learl& rig*t in
oing so. 6r. >*elle&" +*ile not isputing t*e purporte aoption of
t*e pro$eeings b& t*e li'uiator" *as aresse to us a $areful
argument esigne to s*o+ t*at" +*ere an a$tion is broug*t
+it*out t*e aut*orit& of t*e purporte plaintiff" t*e a$tion is an utter
an $omplete nullit&" so t*at no amount of subse'uent ratifi$ation
$an $ure t*e efe$t5 an *e *as referre us to a number of
aut*orities +*i$* in *is submission support t*e $on$lusion.
Of t*e $ases on +*i$* *e relie" t*e first +as Aams v. #onon
Improve 6otor Coa$* 4uilers #.
5
" +*i$* *e $ite for some
observations of Atkin" #.J." +*o saiE @I s*oul like to point out t*at
it seems to follo+ t*at" if t*e efenants *a been su$$essful in
t*eir $ontention t*at t*ere +as no emplo&ment b& t*e plaintiff of
t*e soli$itors" t*e result +oul be t*at t*e a$tion +oul be a nullit&5
it +oul be broug*t in t*e name of a plaintiff +*o *a given no
aut*orit& to bring an a$tion for *im5 an t*e efenants +oul *ave
t*e rig*t to *ave t*e pro$eeings sta&e" an I presume to *ave t*e
usual orer t*at t*e soli$itors pa& t*e $osts of bot* parties. <*at is
an appli$ation t*at $an be mae e'uall& b& t*e efenant or b& t*e
plaintiffE see Feilinger v. Fibbs
G
5 Cape 4reton Compan& v. Fenn
0
.
I o not stop to is$uss t*ose $ases" but it seems to me to follo+
from t*e fa$t of t*e a$tion being broug*t +it*out t*e aut*orit& of
t*e plaintiff t*at it is" so far as t*e efenants are $on$erne" a
nullit&@.
Be;t is In re FitDgeral .#or2
/
" in bankrupt$&" +*ere t*e
pro$eeings +ere broug*t in t*e name of t*e Offi$ial -e$eiver
+it*out *is aut*orit&. A trustee in bankrupt$& +as subse'uentl&
appointe an *e instru$te t*e soli$itors +*o *a laun$*e t*e
pro$eeings to $ontinue t*em in *is name. <*e Offi$ial -e$eiver
later pointe out t*at *e *a never aut*oriDe t*e pro$eeings" an
t*e person against +*om t*e pro$eeings +ere broug*t t*ereupon
applie for a sta& of all pro$eeings uner t*e motion an aske
t*at it mig*t be ismisse as *aving been laun$*e an maintaine
+it*out t*e $onsent of t*e Offi$ial -e$eiver. !orrige" J." e$ie
t*at t*e motion must be ismisse an t*at t*e soli$itors must pa&
t*e opposite part&?s $osts of t*e motion an of t*e appli$ation to
sta& t*e pro$eeings as bet+een part& an part&" an also t*e
soli$itorAanA$lient $osts of t*e Offi$ial -e$eiver. *684 6r. >*elle&
pla$e some relian$e on t*at $ase" be$ause it is to be observe t*at
t*e pro$eeings +ere sta&e" even alt*oug* t*e trustee +ante to
$arr& t*em on5 but t*at affors no true parallel to t*e present $ase"
be$ause t*e Offi$ial -e$eiver *a never at an& time aut*oriDe t*e
pro$eeings. <*e 'uestion in t*e present $ase is a 'uestion bet+een
t*e $ompan& an t*e efenants" an t*e 'uestion is +*et*er t*e
$ompan& *as effe$tivel& aopte t*e pro$eeings broug*t in its
name. It is not a $ase +*ere some su$$essor of t*e original plaintiff"
t*e original plaintiff never *aving aut*oriDe t*e pro$eeings" seeks
to aopt an $arr& t*em on. <*ere is no $*ange of part& in t*e
present $ase. <*erefore" I $annot regar t*at $ase as supporting 6r.
>*elle&?s $ontention t*at t*e institution of t*e a$tion +it*out
aut*orit& is a matter +*i$* amits of no subse'uent ratifi$ation b&
t*e part& mae plaintiff.
<*e *eanote to t*e report of -e&nols v. !o+ell
9
statesE @)*ere an
attorne& brings an a$tion +it*out t*e aut*orit& of t*e plaintiff" t*e
plaintiff is entitle to *ave t*e pro$eeings sta&e +it*out pa&ment
of $osts@. <*e 'uestion +as +*et*er t*e pro$eeings $oul be
sta&e un$onitionall& or sta&e onl& on terms as to t*e $osts. I
t*ink t*at t*e passage upon +*i$* 6r. >*elle& prin$ipall& relie +as
t*at +*ere 4la$kburn" J." sai
1=
E @!o+ $an +e sa& t*at +e oug*t to
impose terms on sta&ing t*ese pro$eeings" +*i$*" if t*e a$tion
+ent on furt*er" +oul be a nullit&H@. It is to be observe t*at
t*ere" again" appears t*e e;pression @a nullit&@" +*i$* +as use b&
Atkin" #.J." in Aams? $ase
11
. 6r. >*elle& seeks to support *is
argument b& stret$*ing t*e +or @nullit&@ to its fullest e;tent" so as
to mean absolutel& voi ab initio +it*out an& possibilit& of
subse'uent valiation5 but I t*ink t*at t*e most signifi$ant part of
t*e ,ugment of 4la$kburn" J." in t*is $ase of -e&nols v.
!o+ell
18
is to be foun at t*e en of *is ,ugment" in t*e passage
to +*i$* !oson" #.J." $alle attention in t*e $ourse of t*e
argument" +*ere *is #ors*ip sai
11
E @In t*is $ase" as t*e a$tion
+as broug*t +it*out aut*orit&" on t*e aut*orit& of -obson v.
(aton
14
" t*e plaintiffs are entitle to *ave t*e a$tion sta&e" an
+it*out pa&ment of $osts. I ma& a t*at" in m& opinion" if a
plaintiff after a$tion broug*t in *is name b& an attorne& +it*out
aut*orit& *ears of it" an oes not repuiate it" *e +ill be suppose
to *ave ratifie t*e*685 attorne&?s a$t@. <*at passage seems to me
to s*o+ $learl& t*at" in t*e vie+ of 4la$kburn" J." it +as possible for
a plaintiff to ratif& t*e a$t of an attorne& or soli$itor in bringing an
a$tion in t*e name of t*at plaintiff +it*out previousl& obtaining t*at
plaintiff?s aut*orit& so to o.
#astl&" 6r. >*elle& referre to #onon an 4la$k+all -ail+a& Co. v.
Cross
15
" +*en t*e $ase +as before t*e Court of Appeal. <*e
'uestion in t*at $ase +as +*et*er t*e in,un$tion $oul be grante
to restrain t*e unaut*oriDe use of t*e $omplainant?s name in
$ertain ot*er pro$eeings an" reversing t*e ,ugment of C*itt&" J."
it +as *el in t*is $ourt t*at t*at +as not a permissible reme&. In
t*e $ourse of t*e ,ugments" a istin$tion +as ra+n bet+een an
appli$ation of t*at kin an an appli$ation of t*e kin +*i$* is no+
before t*is $ourt5 t*at is to sa&" an appli$ation in an a$tion to sta&
t*e pro$eeings or strike out t*e plaintiffs on t*e groun t*at t*e
pro$eeings +ere broug*t +it*out t*e plaintiffs? aut*orit&. #inle&"
#.J." sai
1G
E @!e@ A t*at is" C*itt&" J. A @put it on t*is groun" t*at
6r. Cross +as pro$eeing +it*out aut*orit&" an t*at t*erefore
t*ere +as ,urisi$tion to restrain *im from using t*e names of *is
allege prin$ipals" an *e referre to t*e o$trine t*at if an a$tion is
broug*t b& a person +it*out aut*orit& it $an be stoppe. <*at is no
oubt" 'uite true" but upon +*at prin$iple is t*at oneH It is upon
t*e prin$iple t*at t*e $ourt $an $ontrol t*e pro$eeings before itself"
an if a person +it*out aut*orit& is bringing an a$tion in t*e name
of anot*er it is an abuse of t*e pro$ess of t*e $ourt" an t*e $ourt
$an stop it@.
<*en Fr&" #.J." sai
10
in t*e same $onte;tE @In t*at $lass of $ases
t*e $ourt sta&s t*e pro$eeings be$ause it fins t*at t*ere *as been
an abuse of its o+n pro$ess" an be$ause it *as a ut& to keep its
re$ors trut*ful an prevent pro$eeings taken before it from being
ot*er t*an +*at t*e& are represente to be@. <*en *e $ontraste
t*at +it* t*e 'uestion of granting an in,un$tion" +*i$* *e sai" t*e
$ourt *a no general ,urisi$tion to o in $ertain $ases.
#opes" #.J." sai" to t*e same effe$t
1/
E @It oes not appear to me
t*at t*e analog& is $orre$t" for t*ere t*e $ourt +oul strike out t*e
name of t*e plaintiff or efenant" or sta& t*e pro$eeings" as t*e
$ase mig*t be" on t*e groun t*at it *a full aut*orit& to prevent
an& abuse of its o+n pro$eeings@ *686
I fin not*ing in an& of t*ose $ases to $onstrain me to *ol t*at t*e
issue of a +rit an t*e $ommen$ing of an a$tion +it* t*e aut*orit&
of t*e purporte plaintiff is a matter +*i$* amits of no valiation
b& subse'uent ratifi$ation of t*e a$t of t*e soli$itor $on$erne. >o to
*ol +oul be to introu$e" as I see it" an entirel& novel o$trine
into t*e orinar& la+ of prin$ipal an agent an to make a ne+
e;$eption to t*e general rule t*at ever& ratifi$ation relates ba$k an
is eeme e'uivalent to an ante$eent aut*orit&.
In t*e absen$e of an& e$ision $ompelling me to o so" I" speaking
for m&self" e$line so to *ol. I agree +it* +*at +as sai b&
-o;burg*" J." an I t*ink t*at *e rig*tl& took t*e vie+ t*at to
a$$ee to 6r. >*elle&?s $ontention +oul be in$onsistent +it* t*e
aut*orities in +*i$* 'uestions of t*is kin *ave arisen" parti$ularl&
in relation to $ompanies. I +oul refer to t*e passage in 4u$kle& on
t*e Companies A$ts .18t* e.2" p. 1G9" +*ere t*e relevant la+ is" in
m& vie+" $orre$tl& summariDe. <*e passage o$$urs in t*e $ourse of
a is$ussion on t*e $ir$umstan$es in +*i$* a $ompan&?s name $an
be use as plaintiff in an a$tion an e;$eptions to t*e general rule
t*at a $ompan& is t*e onl& proper plaintiff in respe$t of a +rong
one to t*e $ompan&" a is$ussion" in s*ort" of t*e aspe$t of
$ompan& la+ relate to +*at is $ommonl& $alle t*e rule in Foss v.
!arbottle
19
.
<*e relevant passage .in 4u$kle&2 for t*e present purpose is in
t*ese termsE @.G2 If t*e $ase be one in +*i$* t*e $ompan& oug*t to
be plaintiff" t*e fa$t t*at t*e seal is in t*e possession of t*e averse
part& +ill not ne$essaril& pre$lue t*e intening plaintiffs from using
t*e $ompan&?s name. Beit*er +ill it be ne$essar& to obtain t*e
resolution of a general meeting in favour of t*e a$tion before t*e
+rit is issue. In man& $ases t*e ela& mig*t amount to a enial of
,usti$e. In a $ase of urgen$&" t*e intening plaintiffs ma& use t*e
$ompan&?s name at t*eir peril" an sub,e$t to t*eir being able to
s*o+ t*at t*e& *ave t*e support of t*e ma,orit&. In an a$tion so
$onstitute" t*e $ourt ma& give interlo$utor& relief" taking $are t*at
a meeting be $alle at t*e earliest possible ate to etermine
+*et*er t*e a$tion reall& *as t*e support of t*e ma,orit& or not@.
<*at passage" +*ere it refers to t*e $alling of a meeting" a$$ors
+it* t*e +ellAsettle pra$ti$e of t*e $ourt in $ase in *687 +*i$*" in
pro$eeings broug*t b& a $ompan&" a ispute arises as to t*e
aut*orit& +it* +*i$* t*e $ompan&?s name *as been use as
plaintiff. It is $ommon pra$ti$e in su$* $ases to a,ourn an& motion
broug*t to strike out t*e $ompan&?s name" +it* a vie+ to a meeting
being $alle to see +*et*er t*e $ompan& esires t*e a$tion to be
broug*t or not. At first sig*t" t*at pro$eure is +*oll& in$onsistent
+it* 6r. >*elle&?s $ontention t*at an a$tion broug*t +it*out
aut*orit& is a nullit& +*i$* $annot be valiate b& ratifi$ation" as it
+oul be entirel& ile" if 6r. >*elle& is rig*t" to *ol su$* a meeting
at all. 4ut 6r. >*elle& seeks to e;tri$ate *imself from t*at iffi$ult&
b& an argument on t*ese lines. !e amits t*at it is t*e pra$ti$e of
t*e $ourt in su$* $ases to ire$t a meeting to be *el5 but t*e
meeting is $alle" not to fin out +*et*er t*e $orporators esire t*e
a$tion to pro$ee at t*e ate of t*e meeting" but to fin out
+*et*er" at t*e ate on +*i$* t*e +rit +as issue" t*e $orporators"
if $onsulte on t*e matter" +oul *ave agree to t*e a$tion being
broug*t.
<*at seems to me to introu$e a +*oll& impra$ti$able refinement
into t*is bran$* of t*e la+. If 6r. >*elle&?s argument is rig*t" t*en"
for e;ample" if s*ares *a $*ange *ans bet+een t*e ate +*en
t*e +rit +as issue an t*e ate +*en t*e meeting +as *el to
e$ie +*et*er t*e a$tion +as to pro$ee or not" su$* meeting" on
t*e fa$e of it" +oul be 'uite ile" be$ause t*e onl& people +*ose
vie+s $oul be relevant in t*e matter +oul be t*ose people +*o
*el t*e s*ares at t*e ate +*en t*e a$tion +as broug*t. I $an see
reall& no ,ustifi$ation at all for so unerstaning t*e la+ as
summariDe" $orre$tl& in m& vie+" in t*e passage I *ave 'uote
from 4u$kle&.
I t*ink t*at t*e true position is simpl& t*at a soli$itor +*o starts
pro$eeings in t*e name of a $ompan& +it*out verif&ing +*et*er *e
*as proper aut*orit& so to o" or uner an erroneous assumption as
to t*e aut*orit&" oes so at *is o+n peril" an t*at" so long as t*e
matter rests t*ere" t*e a$tion is not properl& $onstitute. In t*at
sense" it is a nullit& an $an be sta&e at an& time" provie t*at
t*e aggrieve efenant oes not unul& ela& *is appli$ation5 but
it is open at an& time to t*e purporte plaintiff to ratif& t*e a$t of
t*e soli$itor +*o starte t*e a$tion to aopt t*e pro$eeings" to
approve all t*at *as been one in t*e past" an to instru$t t*e
soli$itor to $ontinue t*e a$tion. )*en t*at *as been one" t*en" in
a$$oran$e +it* t*e orinar& la+ of prin$ipal an agent an in
a$$oran$e +it* t*e orinar& o$trine of ratifi$ation" in m& vie+" t*e
efe$t in t*e pro$eeings as originall& $onstitute is $ure5 an it" is
no longer open to t*e*688 efenant to ob,e$t on t*e groun t*at
t*e pro$eeings t*us ratifie an aopte +ere" in t*e first instan$e"
broug*t +it*out proper aut*orit&.
For t*ese reasons I am of t*e opinion t*at -o;burg*" J." $ame to a
rig*t $on$lusion" an t*at t*is appeal fails an s*oul be ismisse.
!OD>OB" #.J.
I am prepare to assume" as i m& #or an t*e ,uge" t*at t*e
pro$eeings +ere institute +it*out aut*orit&" be$ause no argument
*as been aresse to t*is $ourt on t*e effe$t of t*e agreement of
6a&" 1949. >imilarl&" I o not propose to sa& an&t*ing about t*e
'uestion +*et*er t*e efenants are isable b& reason of t*e
ela& +*i$* *as taken pla$e" for t*e simple reason t*at 6r. >*elle&
*as not been $alle upon to argue upon t*at point. I" like m& #or"
+oul rest m& ,ugment on t*e presen$e of ratifi$ation. If t*e la+ is
$orre$tl& set out in t*e passage of 4u$kle& on t*e Companies A$ts
.18t* e.2" p. 1G9" to +*i$* m& #or *as referre" t*is $ase is not in
essen$e ifferent from t*e orinar& $ase in +*i$* someone" a$ting
on be*alf of t*e $ompan& or purporting to a$t on be*alf of t*e
$ompan&" issues a +rit at *is peril an subse'uentl& obtains t*e
ne$essar& support of t*e $ompan& to t*at a$tion. In m& vie+" it is
impossible to argue t*at pro$eeings institute +it*out aut*orit&
are" in t*e te$*ni$al sense of t*e +or" a nullit&5 an t*e $ases
referre to on t*at page of 4u$kle& ini$ate t*e $ontrar&.
6r. >*elle&" *o+ever" *as foune an argument parti$ularl& on t+o
$ases in +*i$* t*e +or @nullit&@ +as use. In t*e first $ase" Aams
v. #onon Improve 6otor Coa$* 4uilers
8=
t*e 'uestion +as
+*et*er a plaintiff +*o *a given no +ritten retainer to *is soli$itors
+as entitle to ,ugment in t*e a$tion against t*e efenant +it*
$osts5 an it +as in t*at $ase t*at Atkin" #.J." sai
81
E @if t*e
efenants *a been su$$essful in t*eir $ontention t*at t*ere +as
no emplo&ment b& t*e plaintiff of t*e soli$itors" t*e result +oul be
t*at t*e a$tion +oul be a nullit&5 it +oul be broug*t in t*e name
of a plaintiff +*o *a given no aut*orit& to bring an a$tion for *im5
an t*e efenants +oul *ave t*e rig*t to *ave t*e pro$eeings
sta&e" an I presume to *ave t*e usual orer t*at t*e soli$itors
pa& t*e $osts of bot* parties@. <*e #or Justi$e +as $learl& appl&ing
*imself to t*e $ase before *im an not $onsiering +*et*er t*e
pro$eeings +oul be" in a te$*ni$al sense" a nullit&" *689 be$ause"
if t*ere +as reall& a nullit&" t*ere +oul be not*ing to sta&.
<*e same observation applies to -e&nols v. !o+ell
88
" +*ere
4la$kburn" J." saiE @!o+ $an +e sa& t*at +e oug*t to impose terms
on sta&ing t*ese pro$eeings" +*i$*" if t*e a$tion +ent on furt*er"
+oul be a nullit&H@. <*at *e i not regar t*e pro$eeings as" in
t*e te$*ni$al sense of t*e +or" a nullit& is $lear from t*e final
passage in *is ,ugment" in +*i$* *e e;pressl& averte to t*e
possibilit& of ratifi$ation of t*e attorne&?s a$t b& t*e plaintiff after
a$tion broug*t. 6r. >*elle& soug*t to $onfine t*at observation to
t*e relations*ip bet+een t*e plaintiff an *is soli$itor" as oppose to
t*e relations*ip bet+een t*e plaintiff an t*e efenants. I o not
t*ink t*at t*e observation $an be properl& so $onfine" an I see no
iffi$ult& in -o;burg*" J.?s vie+" +*i$* I t*ink is perfe$tl& $orre$t"
t*at t*e a$t of t*e li'uiator in t*is $ase *as been suffi$ient to ratif&
su$* efe$t" if an&" as previousl& e;iste.
For t*ese reasons as +ell as for t*ose given b& m& #or" I agree
t*at t*is appeal fails.
Re*resentation
>oli$itorsE Pa&ne" !i$ks 4ea$* C Co. 5 Osmon" 4ar C )estbrook .
Appeal ismisse. .4. A. 4. 2
1. 719=19 A. C. 84= .
8. 719819 1 :. 4. 495 .
1. .19142 118 #. <. /G .
4. .1//52 11 C*. D. 158 .
5. 719819 1 :. 4. 495 " 5=1.
G. 71/909 1 C*. 409 .
0. .1//12 10 C*. D. 19/ .
/. 118 #. <. /G .
9. .1/012 #. -. / 3. 4. 19/ .
1=. Ibi. 199.
11. 719819 1 :. 4. 495 .
18. #. -. / 3. 4. 19/ .
11. Ibi. 4==.
14. .10/52 1 <. -. G8 .
15. 11 C*. D. 154 .
1G. Ibi. 10=.
10. Ibi. 101.
1/. Ibi. 101.
19. .1/412 8 !are 4G1
8=. 719819 1 :. 4. 495 .
81. Ibi. 5=1.
88. #. -. / 3. 4. 19/ " 199.
I 8=14 >+eet C 6a;+ell
(BD OF DOCJ6(B<
(c) 2014 Thomson Reuters.