Holiday v Sigil
English trusts case law
| Holiday v Sigil | |
|---|---|
| Court | Court of Chancery |
| Citation(s) | (1826) 2 C&P 176 |
| Keywords | |
| Receipt, ignorance | |
Holiday v Sigil (1826) 2 C&P 176 is a case at common law concerning the recovery of a banknote.[1][2]
Facts
The defendant had a £500 note that had been dropped by the claimant. The claimant brought an action for money had and received. The trial was by jury.
Judgment
Abbott CJ gave the following directions to the jury.
The question to be considered is, whether you are satisfied that the plaintiff lost this note, and that the defendant found it; for if you are, the plaintiff is entitled to your verdict. I should observe, that it is scarcely possible for a plaintiff, when his property is stolen, or accidentally lost, to prove the loss by direct evidence; and, therefore, that must in almost all cases be made out by circumstances.
See also
- v
- t
- e
Knowing receipt cases
Barnes v Addy (1873-74) LR 9 Ch App 244
Belmont Ltd v Williams Furniture Ltd (No 2) [1980] 1 All ER 393
Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] EWCA Civ 2
Re Montagu’s ST [1987] Ch 264
Baden v Societe Generale [1993] 1 WLR 509
El Ajou v Dollar Land Holdings plc [1993] EWCA Civ 4
BCCI (Overseas) Ltd v Akindele [2000] EWCA Civ 502
Dubai Aluminium Co Ltd v Salaam [2002] UKHL 48
Criterion Properties plc v Stratford LLC [2004] UKHL 28
Arthur v AG of Turks and Caicos Islands [2012] UKPC 30
English trusts law
- English trusts law
