Mr. R. N. Macleod appeared for the app nts and de dants, and Mr. J.C. Hanson for th pondent and plaintiff.
Judgment, His Lordship delivered Judgment as follows I think that this appeal should be allowed. The point st issue is one of considerable importance to British companies doing business in Chins. In view of the nature of the jurisdiction exercised by H.M.'s Courts in China and the fact that a British corporation carnot well have its head office in China, or ite secretary resident here, it seems to me that the term foreign corporation is a little misleading. Many such companies are instituted for the purpose of carrying on business in China and practically else, others have a main branch country, and ly represented corporations are amenable to British jurisdiction and to no other. The question which I have now to decide is what is the place of residence in China of such a company, for the result of the law and the cases soams to be that where the company is resident, there will writs have to be served upon it. Consequently I do not think that the question as to whether the defendants wore carrying on business at Tientsin really arises—they are undoubtedly carrying on business in Chins, and, whatever they may do at Tientsin, their head office in this country is at Shangh: If " summons is to be served on an dividual he must be served personally, and corporation must be served in' the prescribed manner; in theabsonce of Rules of Court applicable to Courts in China we follow the English rules. Order 9 rule vincial Court the writ of that be served on him, and similarly if a corporation is so resident it can be so served. The test of residence of a corporation is whether it has its head office within the jurisdiction. The defendants have their head office in China at Shanghai. They sre not therefore resident in the Tientsin district and the writ have been served in Shanghai.
The new Rules of Court which will come into operation in January, do not apply to this case, but they are enacted and they show what are the natures of the jurisdiction of the different British Courts in this country. They seem to me to cover all the cases without hardship.
By Rule 109 (6) service on 's corporat is made by delivering the summonses to secretary or clerk within the ordinar jurisdiction of the Court, always of cours: provided that the corporation is' residem within the jurisdiction, ie., that it he its head China office there; if it has nots then by Rule 111, substituted service may' be had and the writ may be served on an agent; leave is necessary and no doubt on its appearing. that the cause of action arose in the district of the Provincial Court such leave would be given, but the Court can then consider whether the case is one which ought to be brought. before it. To hold that a corporation was resident at many places in Chine because it had branches or agencies in many places might lead to serious quconveniences. I imagine a corporation with its head office in Canton and an agency in Hankow. If it wore held to be resident in Hankow it might be sued there on a contract made and to be carried out in Canton or Amoy, and it might even be sued in two Courts xt the: same time, I think it quite clear that the head office in China is the proper place. to serve.a writ on suck a corporation as the defendants' and that no hardship is caused by such a rul Mr. Macleod applied for, and was granted, costs,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.