Supreme Court on Mon-@ay, Judge Peter Grain delivered his considered judgment in the case, in which the question involved was life assurance company's liability {in regard to the currency the company must pay, method of payment which the com-any, must adopt on the maturity of a policy, when the currency set out in the policy is foreign, and has been. stabilized after very great deprecistion and further, the obligation to pay a surrender value, The plaintiff? in this action was Matteo Bos, an Italian, who was represented' by Mr. M. Reader Harris, of White-Cooper & Ca, and the defendants were the Sun' Lite Assurance Ca. of Canada, who were defended by. Mr. H. Lipson Ward, of Platt & Ca.
His Lordship found in favour the defendant company and accord-Judgment for the defendants with costs.
An application by Dir. H. Lipson Ward for costs on @ special scale, was opposed by Mr. Reader Harris, and denied by his Lordship, The full judgment is as follows:—On November 15, 1917 the plaintiff by a single premium of 7,370 roubles ff the rouble currency of that date had issued to him a policy which matured on November 1, 1927 when the som "of 10,000 roubles with at 1926 he to pay a surrender his statement of claim the plainti? now asks for a declaration by this court that, lo was entitled to be paid the surrender value of the policy on March 4, 1926 rouble notes of the currency in citculation and which were legal tender Rossin.at that date. Namely Tschervonctz treasury notes (Ten Rouble Notes) or Government of the Union of Soviet Soctalist Republic notes.
Or a declaration that he is entitled to be paid by the defendants the present cash surrender value of the aid policy in local currency at the rate of xchange prevailing in Shanghai for the above mentioned roubles at the date when the cash surrender value ought to have bet paid or at the present time, Ani further asks for an order for pay ment of the surrender value at the above mentioned rates together with interest at 8 per cent. per annurr. from March 4, 1926, to date of payment or judgment.
The de-|! fendants plead that the plaintiff not entitled to a surrender value and that to grant such a surrender value is only at the option of the insurance company. But they state that they had offered to pay t! plaintiff as a surrender value sum of Rbls. 8,750 of the same currency in which the premium was paid and they further contend that they are only liable to pay the plaintiff in rouble notes of the same currency in which the premium was paid or in local currency at the rate of exchange prevailing in Shanghai for that currency.
Or in the alternative that they are only Table to make payment in notes of the present Russian cvrrency or the equivalent in local! currency on the basis of one rouble of the present Russian currency equalling 0,000 X 1,000,000 roubles of the same currency in which the single premium was paid.
The Pacts of the Case The facts are as follows:—The plaintiff Mattoo Bos on Italian subject took out a policy on November 1, 1917 in the Ci 'Mutual Life Insurance Ca. for payment to himself on November 1, 1927, of the sum of Rbls. 10,000 with' profits.
He paid' the full amount of premiums namely Rbls. 7,370 Bingle premium in pre-1922 rouble Roles. "Aba later date the China Mutual Life Insurance Ca. was taken over by the Sun Life Assurance (On February 27, 1995, the plainti wrote to the Sun Life and asked "ould you be inclined to buy this policy, and what amount will you offer me for same" on February 27, 1025, the defendant company, wrote saying "with regard to the Surrender value of the policy we shall be prepared to allow yor the fum of Rbls, 6400 at the present time, payable either in rouble
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.