Assignment of actionable claim requires written instrument; unproved transfer cannot support set-off against liquidation debt.

An assignment of an actionable claim must be made by a written instrument signed by the transferor or a duly authorised agent, and no valid assignment was proved here. The fixed deposit receipt and its endorsement were not treated as a negotiable instrument, while the depositor's letter was only a notice of an alleged assignment, not the assignment itself. The surrounding correspondence and conduct also failed to establish completion of the transfer, so the claimed set-off against the company in liquidation was not allowed. The fraudulent preference objection was rejected, but that did not save the application, which failed and was dismissed with costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant had established a valid assignment of the fixed deposit receipt so as to entitle him to set off the deposit against his debt to the company in liquidation, and whether the proposed set-off would amount to a fraudulent preference.

Analysis: A transfer of an actionable claim requires an instrument in writing signed by the transferor or by a duly authorised agent. The materials relied upon did not disclose any such written assignment. The deposit receipt itself, including the endorsement on its reverse, was not treated as a negotiable instrument, and the letter from the depositor was only a notice referring to an alleged assignment rather than the assignment itself. The surrounding correspondence and conduct also indicated that no completed assignment had been proved. On the fraudulent preference objection, the Court held that the authorities relied on were distinguishable because the present matter did not concern unpaid calls on shares or a transaction of the kind there considered.

Conclusion: The applicant failed to prove a valid assignment and therefore was not entitled to the claimed set-off. The objection of fraudulent preference was rejected, but the application still failed and was dismissed with costs.

Ratio Decidendi: An assignment of an actionable claim is ineffective unless made by a written instrument signed by the transferor, and a claimed set-off based on an unproved or merely inferential assignment cannot be allowed.

---