...against the bankrupt's assignees, the defence was that the goods, at the time of the bankruptcy, were in the order and disposition of the bankrupt with the consent of the owner, and that the title to the goods vested in the assignees by virtue of an order of the Court of...

...against assignees and execution creditors. The goods therefore at the time of the bankruptcy were in the order and disposition of the bankrupt, with the consent of the defendant, the true owner. The bill of sale conveyed the whole property in the goods to the defendant...

...dealing with them. Their being in the house was the act of the true owner; and therefore they were in the order and disposition of the bankrupt with the consent of the true owner. Upon these grounds the plaintiffs are entitled to judgment. CHANNELL, B.—On the 22nd of June a deed...

...dealing with them. Their being in the house was the act of the true owner; and therefore the v were in the order and disposition of the bankrupt with the consent of the true owner. Upon these grounds the plaintiffs are entitled to judgment. CHAXJTET.L, B.—On the 22nd of June a...

...already well knew. But even admitting, for the sake of argument, that these shares could have been in the order and disposition of the bankrupt, with the consent of the true owner, in a case where the true owner, being an equitable mortgagee, could do nothing to take them out of...

...FRESHNEY \ J \CABRICK. .... ». Then as to the goods not included in the bill of sale to Ward. These goods were not in the order and disposition of the bankrupt with the consent of the true owner. The 125th section of the 12 & 13 Viet. c. 106, does not apply unless the owner has a right to immediate...

...plaintiff was not entitled to recover the goods from the assignees, for that they were in the possession, order, and disposition of the bankrupt, with the consent of the true owner, within 12 & 13 Viet., c. 100, B. 125.—(Spackman v. Miller, 81 LJ, CP 809.) ARBITRATION.—A marine...

...plaintiff was not entitled to recover the goods from the assignees, for that they were in the possession, order, and disposition of the bankrupt, with the consent of the true owner, within 12 & 13 Viet., c. 106, s. 125.—(Spademan v. Miller, 31 LJ, CP 309.) ARBITRATION.—A marine...

...by the party claiming under the second assignment, precluded from setting up that the goods were in the order and disposition of the bankrupt, with the consent of the first assignee ; because in so doing, although they are claiming adversely to, they are also claiming...

...sufficient property to maintain trover, and that the chariot did not pass to the assignees as being in the order and disposition of the bankrupt with the consent of the true owner. [MAULK, J., referred to Greening v. Clark, 4 B. & Cr. 316.] That case shows, that even assuming the...