Thornley v Tilley [1925] HCA 13

> RHOS

- ad

REPORTS OF CASES

DETERMINED IN THE

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

1925.

{HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.|

THORNLEY . : r " ies ss . APPELLANT; PLarntirr, AND TILLEY AND OTHERS. E M 4 . Responpents. DEFENDANTS,

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES.

Principal and Agent—Sharebroker and client—Purchase of shares—' Carry at 8 ©,

or A. per cent" —Right of sharebroker to deal with shares—Natural meaning of term— 1995. Usage of Stock Bachange—Reasonableness. es A client instructed a sharebroker to buy a certain number of shares in a, Saal company and "carry at 8 per cent." sae a Held, that the sharebroker was not entitled to deal on his own behalf with i a the shares bought in pursuance of such instructions, and was bound to "Isaacs, " account to his client for any profits made by such dealing. Higgins and

Per Knox C.J. and Higgins J.: A custom under which sharebrokers retain such profits would be unreasonable, and would not bind the Court, even if proved; but nosuch custom was proved and under the pleadings any evidence of such a custom was inadmissible.

Decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Harvey J.): Thornley v. Tilley, (1924) 41 N.S.W.W.N. 171, reversed.

2 HIGH COURT (19:

H.C. or A. Appr from the Supreme Court of New South Wales. 1925.

pies A suit was brought in the Supreme Court, in its equitable Tuorntey jurisdiction, by John Brooks Thornley against William Tilley, Fra Turny, Edward Tilley and Herbert Vivian Hordern, trading as Willi —— Tilley & Co. as stock and sharebrokers, in which the plaintiff allege in his statement of claim, shortly, that in or about March 1920 i

was agreed between him and the defendants that the defendant

would buy shares on behalf of the plaintiff when instructed by hi

so to do, that they would on behalf of the plaintiff pay the amounts required to purchase such shares, that they would on behalf of the plaintiff obtain and hold such shares, that the plaintiff should repay