The Sun.
London, England, 1840-11-06 00:00:00

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

( Sittings in Banco.)
EDWARDS AND ANOTHER V. SCOTT AND ANOTHER.

This was an action of trcver brought by the assignees of
a bankrupt named Western, to recover a policy of insurance
on the life of the bankrupt for 3,0001., which had been
placed in the bands of the defendants Es a collateral secu-
ity., cr.pip, verdict !vas-far-the plaintiff. Mr. Platt, in El-
.tae,y,go‘.m 11139, 'obtuineri^a'rrder to 'ahoy', cause- Why ver- •
.die4,4hcorad':aoti be'retisoriiio; mad a 'new•trial grahred:
M. Sergeant TALFOtIftO this day appeared ro show
,cause against the rule, and contended that the verdict was
perfectly consistent with law, inasmuch as it was given in
evidence that the bankrupt had continued to pay up the 1
premium to the time of his bankruptcy, and that no entry
of the assignment to Scott and Company had been
made in the books of the latter Company; the
only thing like a notice to the assignees of the
bankrupt, or other parties interested in the estate, as to
their possession of the policy, being a verbal communica.
tion to the Insurance Company, through a person who
called at the Insurance-office, from the defendants, to in-
quire if the premium had been paid. Under these circum-
stances the Learned Sergeant contended that there was
no valid assignment; that the policy had been actually in
the legal possession of the bankrupt up to the time of his
bankruptcy, and was, therefore, the property of the assig-
nees ; that, therefore, the verdict must not be disturbed.
Mr. Sergeant CIIANNELL followed on the same side.
Mr. GREENWOOD (in the absence of Mr. Platt) sup-
p )rted the rule. He contended that in law and equity
the assignment of the policy was good, without any entry
on the books of the parties to whom it was transferred ;
and that no further notice of the transfer to the insurers,
than the verbal notice proved in evidence, was neccasery.
All that was necessary for the defendants to prove
for the validity of the assignment, was that the bankrupt
had deposited the policy with them, the reputed ownership
thereof being in him at the time. The Learned Counsel
cited several casts, to show that, where there were other
circumstances to make the fact notorious, the mere change
of possession was sufficient, without any written notice or
other writing, to constitute a valid assignment. It had
been repeatedly decided in equity that the mere handing
Ever of the deed was a sufficient assignment, but he considered
the case of Vyall v. Rolle, reported in 9 Vesey, jun.,
page 410, to be conclusive in favour of that decision. Be-
sides, it had been proved at the trial that the fact of the
policy having been transferred to the defendants was made
notorious at a meeting of Western's creditors, which took
place in 1837—that is full four months before Western be-
came a bankrupt. It could not be said, therefore, that he
continued to have the reputed ownership of the policy up
to the time of his bankruptcy. Upon these grounds the
Learned Gentleman submitted that the verdict cou'd net
stand, and that the rula for a new trial should be made
absolute.
(The case was not concluded at the time of going to press.)