High Court of Australia
'O.L.R.] OF AUSTRALIA. 569
[HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]
YURTNEY KING, SMITH & CO. . .. APPELLANT ; DEFENDANT, '
AND
COMMERCIAL BANK OF AUSTRALIA \
ONEU eee eee ah ResponDENT. PLAINTIFF, ROFF COURTNEY KING. .. . . . APPELLANT; Derenpant,
AND
THE COMMERCIAL BANK OF AUSTRALIA | LIMITED AND ANOTHER J RESPONDENTS. DEFENDANTS,
ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA.
Two appeals to the High Court, one by Courtney King, Smith & H. ©. or a. Co. and the other by Roff Courtney King, a partner in that firm, 1920.
_ were brought from decisions of Mann J. in two actions by the mae Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd. against the firm. May 11, 12. The appeals turned solely on questions of fact. Knox C.J..
The judgment of Mann J. in each case was affirmed. sat beeen tls
Each appeal dismissed with costs.
Solicitor for the appellants, Charles B. Coy. Solicitors for the respondent Bank, J. M. Smith & Emmerton.
B. L.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate