MIDLAND BANK CASE
DISMISSAL OF APPEAL. London, March 20. Giving the Appeal Court’s reasons for dismissing the appeal of Charles Robinson in the Midland Bank case, the Master of the Rolls said that the aide-de-camp, Hobbs, and Newton were parties to a conspiracy to catch Sir Hari Singh with Mrs. Robinson. It was clear that the conspirators never intended to pay the money to plaintiff. Thev used the name of Charles Robinson for convenience, but it was a mere cypher and title for an account. Judgment would be varied by allowing plaintiff’s costs due to his proving that jie was not a party to the conspiracy, but these would be set u. against the costs on other issues, on which he was liable to the bank. Lord Justice Atkin said that the only evidence connecting plaintiff with the conspiracy was the evidence of Newton, a convicted forger, self-confessed blackmailer and accomplice in the conspiracy, who was paid £3OOO for giving evidence. The jtirv was entitled to reject Newton’s evidence. The authorities had apparentlv given Newton immunity from criminal proceed- | ings. The result was distinctly encour-• aging for Newton’s infraction of the criminal law of the country.—Reuter.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19250323.2.59
Bibliographic details
Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 151, 23 March 1925, Page 9
Word Count
196MIDLAND BANK CASE Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 151, 23 March 1925, Page 9
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Dominion. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in