Imagens das páginas

TRUSTEES. 192. Under the Building Societies Act, 1874.—May be appointed by the society, or the directors, for the purpose of investments (of surplus funds) in the public funds, or to be admitted (not more than three) as tenants in respect of copyhold or customary estate. 37 & 38 Vict. c. 42, ss. 25, 28.

193. When a trustee is absent, or becomes bankrupt, or files any petition, or executes any deed for liquidation of his affairs by assignment or arrangement, or for composition with his creditors, or becomes a lunatic, or is dead, or if it be unknown whether he is alive or dead, the registrar, on application and proof satisfactory to him, may direct the transfer of any stock (standing in the name of such person) into the name of any other person or persons as trustee or trustees. 37 & 38 Vict. c. 42, s. 26.

194. All property, &c., now held in trust for a society, certified under 6 & 7 Will. 4, c.32, vests in the society on its incorporation, without any conveyance or assignment, except in cases where the title cannot be transferred without admittance. 37 & 38 Vict. c. 42, s. 27.

VOTING FOR COUNTIES. 195. Mortgagor's right to vote-8 Hen. 6, c. 7.The right to vote is not conferred upon a borrower from a building society, unless the annual value of the land mortgaged exceeds the annual payments to the society (for interest) by forty shillings: Copland, app. v. Bartlett, resp., 1848, 6 C. B. 18; 13 Jur. 127; 2 Lutw. Reg. Ca. 183; Beamish, app. v. Stoke, resp. 1851 ; 11 C. B. 29; 21 L. J. 9 C. P.; explained by Rolleston v. Cope (infra).

196. Value of mortgagor's interest should be ascertained.—A member of a building society received an advance of seventy-three pounds to purchase a piece of land, of which the annual value was three pounds, and mortgaged it to the society to secure the monthly payments, amounting annually to four pounds. Before the 31st January he had paid instalments to the amount of seventy-one pounds. The revising barrister found that the mortgagor had, prior to the 31st January, a freehold estate of the value of forty shillings per annum (above all charges), and retained his name on the list of voters :

Held (by Erle, C. J., Williams, Byles, and Keating, JJ.) that his decision was right.

Byles, J., distinguished between Copland v. Bartlet, (supra), and the present case, that the barrister there did not find what the value of the voter's interest was; but here the value, before the last payment was made, was found to be seventy-one pounds. He also said that he thought the principle wrong which would reduce the value of the beneficial interest by the periodical payments made in diminution of the principal.

Robinson v. Dunkley, 1863; 15 C. B. (N. S.) 478; 33 J. T. 57 C.P.

197. In ascertaining annual value to mortgagor, interest only to be deducted.-A member of a building society mortgaged a freehold to the society as security for an advance of three hundred pounds. By the terms of the deed and the rules of the society, he was bound, in order to redeem the property, to pay to the society, during a period of ten years from 1863, monthly instalments, for principal, interest, and expenses, which amounted in the whole to forty-one pounds eight shillings each year, two-thirds of which was in discharge of principal, and one-third in payment of interest; and in case of certain defaults, a power of entry was reserved to the society. The interest, which was not more than seven per cent. for the term, was capitalized, and added to the sum borrowed. The mortgagor had paid three hundred and fifty pounds, and two years remained during which he had still to pay the monthly instalments; but he was entitled to redeem the property by a present payment of seventy-three pounds one shilling. The annual value of the houses was thirty-one pounds four shillings.

The Court of Common Pleas (Bovill, C. J., Willes,

Montague Smith, and Brett, JJ.), held that, in ascertaining the yearly value of the estate to the mortgagor, the interest only was to be deducted, and not the payments made in reduction of the principal mortgage debt, and consequently that the mortgagor had an estate of more than the yearly value of forty shillings, above all charges, in respect of which he was entitled to a vote for the county. Copland v. Bartlett and Beamish v. Stoke (supra), considered ; Robinson v. Dunkley (supra), followed: Rolleston v. Cope, 1871 ; L. R. 6 C. P. 292.

WILL. 198. What is included in word Moneys.A testator bequeathed by his will “ all the moneys both in the house and out of it.” He was possessed of a sum of Consols and some shares in a building society.

Bacon, V. C., held, that neither passed by the bequest: Collins v. Collins, 1871; 24 L. T. Rep. (n. s.), 780.

Member dying without will. See DEATH.

WINDING-UP. 199. A building society may be wound up either voluntarily under the supervision of the court, by the court, if the court shall so order, on the petition of(a) Any member authorized by three-fourths of

the members present at a general meeting specially called for the purpose, to present

the same on behalf of the society ; (6) Any judgment-creditor for not less than fifty

pounds. 37 & 38 Vict. c. 42, s. 32. See also DISSOLUTION.

200. General orders for regulating the proceedings of the court may be made by the proper authority, and notice of the commencement and termination of every winding-up is to be sent to the registrar, and registered by him. 37 & 38 Vict. c. 42, s. 32.

201. Appointment of provisional liquidator.—A provisional liquidator will not, in general, be appointed before the hearing of a winding-up petition, not presented by the society, unless the court is satisfied that the petition is unopposed. Decision of Romilly, M. R., affirmed : Re Cilfoden Building Society (a), 1868; L. R. 3 Ch. Ap. 462.

202. When winding-up petition barred.A petition to wind up a building society by a member, who had given notice of withdrawal but had not been paid, was dismissed on the ground that he had no such substantial interest in the society's assets as would entitle him to support the petition, and had acquiesced in a resolution, by which the losses were to be exclusively borne by those persons who were members antecedently to the resolution ; although it was passed after he gave the notice, and although it was admitted from the circumstances to be bad, as being ultra vires of the society. Money however had been borrowed on the faith of the resolution, and the claims of the lenders, which were shown to exceed the value of the society's assets, obtained a priority against the members. Decision of Malins, V. C., affirmed by Selwyn and Giffard, L. JJ.: Re London Building Society, 1869; 21 L. T. Rep. (N. s.) 8 Ch.

203. Though & creditor is entitled to a winding-up order against an insolvent company ex debito justitiæ, this is not so as to a contributory : Re Professional, &c., Building Society, 1871; L. R. 6 Ch. Ap. 856.

204. Petition by withdrawing member.-E., a member of a benefit building society, who had given notice of withdrawal, entitling her to be paid in rotation, and who had not been paid, was held by Lord Romilly, M. R., not entitled ex debito justitia to an order for

(a) This decision, and those which follow, although relat. ing to winding up proceedings under the Companies Acts in the Court of Chancery, are inserted here as they would probably be followed in proceedings under the winding-up clause of the Building Societies Act, 1874.

winding up the society, and, under the circumstances, an order was refused : Re Planet Building Society, 1872; L. R. 14 Eq. 441.

205. Notice of withdrawal prior to winding-up order. -Where a building society was being wound up, and certain unadvanced shareholders had been removed from the list of contributories on the ground that they had, more than one month prior to the petition for winding up, given notice of their intention to withdraw, in accordance with the rules of the society: Wood, V. C., held, that a claim for interest under the rules should be allowed at five per cent., with annual rests, and that the claimant was at liberty to add the amount of his costs to the debt: Re Doncaster Building Society, Ex parte Clark, 1866 ; 14 L. T. Rep. (n. s.) 13.

WITHDRAWAL. 206. The terms upon which shares may be withdrawn must be set forth in the rules. 37 & 38 Vict. c. 42,

s. 16.

207. Amount withdrawable how to be ascertained. Previous to the passing of the Building Societies Act, 1874, it had been held that a member, who had given notice to withdraw, might file a bill in Chancery to ascertain and recover the amount due to him (Smith v. Lloyd, 1859 ; 26 Beav. 507), but that statute makes provision for the determination of all disputes between the society and any of its members. See DISPUTES.

208. Where the amount due had been settled by arbitration, the Court declined to inquire whether the amount awarded was correct according to the rules : Armitage v. Walker, 1855, 2 Kay & J. 224.

209. Even before the statute 37 & 38 Vict. c. 42, it had been decided that questions as to priority of payment among the members withdrawing, should be determined by arbitration: Wright v. Deeley, 1866, 4 H. & C. 209.

See also WINDING-UP (204).

« AnteriorContinuar »