1933 (1) TMI 18

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vember, 1929, to August, 1930, at prices to be fixed during the month of delivery at the buyers' option, cash before delivery. The defendant did not disclaim the contract, but on June 20, 1930, wrote to the brokers who had negotiated the contract asking them to arrange that payment should be made after actual delivery instead of before delivery, and to this request the plaintiffs acceded. The liquidator and the plaintiffs carried out the contract accordingly until the month of August, 1930. On August 29, 1930, the brokers fixed the price for the deliveries outstanding, namely, 100 bales, and the defendant on September 4, 1930, accepted this fixing of the price. The goods, however, were not accepted by the company or the defendant, and it is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nager appointed by the Court, and that there is a presumption that when he performs a contract without disclaimer, or makes a new contract, he does so in his personal capacity, and that this presumption is not rebutted by his describing himself as liquidator. Reliance was placed principally upon the decision in Burt, Boulton and Hayward v. Bull, where it was held on the facts that a receiver and manager appointed by the Court who had given an order for goods in his own name, but describing himself as receiver and manager, was personally liable, because a receiver and manager of a company is not the agent of the company, and the words "receiver and manager" would not therefore suggest that the receiver was contracting as agent for the compan....