Day 190 - 23 Nov 95 - Page 20
1 Fry L.J.:
2
3 "I have come to the same conclusion. I see no
4 reason why the secretary should be held to have
5 had authority to make these representations so
6 as to bind the company by way of estoppel. No
7 evidence was given of the existence of such
8 authority. It is suggested that the Court will
9 take cognizance of the nature of the office of a
10 secretary, and that such an authority is
11 ordinarily incidental thereto. I do not think
12 that is so."
13
14 Lopes L.J., on the next page:
15
16 "In this case we are asked to infer from the
17 mere fact that a person was the secretary of a
18 tramway company that he had authority to make
19 representations with regard to the financial
20 situation and relations of the company, although
21 there was no evidence whatever of any express
22 authority nor any evidence that the making of
23 such representations was within the scope of his
24 duty."
25
26 I emphasise those words, because it is the second time they
27 have come up.
28
29 "It seems to me that it would be most
30 unreasonable to make the inference which we are
31 asked to make."
32
33 MR. MORRIS: Can I ask a question ---
34
35 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
36
37 MR. MORRIS: -- for clarification? You know, to my uninformed
38 legal mind here, these seem to be relating to whether --
39 this is not whether it is admissible as hearsay, but
40 whether such a statement would bind the Company as, you
41 know, you cannot go beyond it as an admission; and it does
42 not seem to me that is what this particular case is about.
43 We are talking about whether something is admissible or
44 not.
45
46 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What I suggest you do is just listen to the
47 way Mr. Rampton puts it, and then get your points together,
48 because it may be that he is quoting this case on the point
49 of who has authority ---
50
51 MR. RAMPTON: That is right.
52
53 MR. JUSTICE BELL: -- to make statements and who does not.
54
55 MR. MORRIS: That would be an authority to be what would be
56 binding on the Company, such as, for example, we have a
57 formal admission from McDonald's -----
58
59 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do not argue it now. I am just trying to
60 help you by explaining the way I understand it. One of the
