The Sun.
London, England, 1835-09-07 00:00:00

__4e____

1

HOUSE OF LORDS-SATURDAY.

(Before Lords BROUGHAM, LYNDHURST, the Earl of DEVON,
and other Peers.)
JUDGMENTS.
This morning Lord BROUGHAM came down at half-past
eleven, to deliverjudgment, in the following cases, some of
which had been heard a considerable time since, and had
lain over for consideration ; and others under instructions
to the parties with rezpect to points of reference, &c.
THE HON. ROBERT KING, V. HAMLET.
This was an appeal from a decision of Lord Brougham
when he held the great seal, in which the e_ppellant's bill was
dismissed, and an injunction which had been previously
granted by the Court on his behalf, dissolved.
Lord LYNDHURST to-day gave judgment. He said that
lie had attended carefully to the argument at their Lord-
ships' bar ; that since then he had read over the elaborate
judgment of his Noble and Learned Friend, who had de-
cided the case in the Court below, and he perfectly con-
curred that his Noble and Learned Friend had come to a
right conclusion. His Lordship then recommended the
House to affirm that judgment.
Lord BaouoHam•--,-What is to be done with respect to
costs ?
Lord LYNDHURST then made some inquiries as to what
bad been done by the Court of Chancery wits respect to
the injunction, and the costs of the cause, and after a few
further remarks between the two Noble and Learned Lords,
the judgment was affirmed without costs.
BUSHE V. LOCKE.
Lord BROUGHAM stated, that in :his case, which had
been heard in the early part of the last session before him and
Lord Wynford,' there had been a doubt expressed by that
Learned Lord whether the judges could properly be called -
on. to decide the qu,'stions involved in it, that it was in fact
a question of equity and not of law, and it had been so'
treated in the Court of Chancery. by the Learned Lord wit,
presided at the argument, and who had never thought th
case 'was a proper one to be sent for the opinion of a court `.
of law. The case had been affirmed in the existing session
by their Lor&hips, and in consideration of the doubts exist-
, . .

• s--- a in th,.' been pursui.l, he could not
recommend their Lordships to add with costs, as the case
would not properly admit of it under the circumstances.—
Judgthent affirmed without costs.
THE EARL OF BANDON V. H. R. E. BEECHEY%
Lord BROUGHAM said, tht.t as he had stated t,is views
very fully when this case was last argued before their Lord-
ships, he should not feel it necessary to enter at present at
any length into the particulars of it. Their Lordships
might recollect that there were two points on which the case
appeared to turn, on one of which he had already declared
that he had no doubt, and the other required time for in-
quiry and consideration. Since then he had had a commu-
nication
With the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, from whose
court this-case came by appeal, and obtained from him an •
account of the reasons on which he had decided that branch
of the case. He did not mean to say that this was a case
entirely free from doubt ; but, on the whole, he was of
opinion that judgment should be affirmed, holding as he did
the opinion that a court of appeal ought never to reverse a
decree unless it was quite confident that the judgment'
given in the court below was wrong. It did- not fol-
low, howevcr, that in the present case costs ought to
given, and he should advise their Lordships aceortnoly._
Judgment affirmed withont costs. •

HOGGAN V. RANIiP.N.
In this case (which had been 'appointed to stand till
some information bee" obtained from the conveoveryancers
of Scotland respeet•:,g the practice of the courts there),
judgment
:Wag postponed.