Plaintit' Unable to Get of Original Judgment for Return of Promissory Notes: Fresh Application to Be Made to H, M. Court of First Instance At H. M, Supreme Court on Suturday, Judge Sir Skinner Turner gave the decision of the Fpll Court Appeal, consisting of his Lord-li ship and Sir Henry Couper Gollan, Chief Justice of Hongkong, which sat on December 8 in the case of Fermus 1. the Siberian Agricultural Corporation, Judgment was origi-given for R, Fermus, a French gitieons fgr promimory no toy tot Jing appMximately $58,000, Follow. ing. the review of the ease by the Fall Court this judgment has now been set aside" and. the matter voterred back to the Court of First Instance, for a fresh application for payment.
Judge Sir Skinner Turner said:
This isan appeal against a Judgment of mine delivered on July 38, 1924, in which I directed judg ment to be entered for the plaintiff certain actions and order Payment out of certain moneys in Court to be made to him, Tt is unfortunate that no formal order or judgment was drawn up in this care, and it seems certain that difficulties have arisen in the argument in consequence, Such a formal order is necessary in all appeals to this Court and to the Privy Council, Rule 166-(6) says "an order shall not be. ". appenled from... until it forms part of the record; and our Fall Coury Rulet (No, 1 of 1910) require an official copy of the judgment or order appealed agains, to be fled with the notice of motion (Section 2) (sce further Section 7 of the same yules). Mere all that was supplied copy of thy Judge' notes one wouseh. This mast be: question hed been raised by the! Tiquidator of the Corporation as the comeciness of the amount paid in. T therefore suggested a motion for judgment. On the claimants summons, I said that Malyguin ought to bring an action against} Fermus, thus to my mind giving quite clearly in an extraterritorial country the direction asked the competent court. The evidence before this Court now is that, preparations were int once made to start such an action in the French Consular Court at* Tientsin, though for one reason or another, it was! not actually begun till September 14. On July 10 plaintiff filed a motion for judgment in the consolidated actions and asked for payment out of the moneys and for Jorders as to costs. That motion feame into Court on July 28 and T then entered judgment with costs! for the plaintiff on the promissory, motes and ordered payment out of the moneys in Court to him, Against that judgment and order the claim mant appeals on grounds set out 'a motion of appeal of August 20. and, if he can get leave, on addi tional grounds filed by him on December 6 last. The appeal was heard on December 9 and 10 and [judgment was reserved.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.